The third edition of Briggs and Rees, Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments, brings it up to date with the developing jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice and the English courts. More significantly, it has revised the text to focus on Regulation 44/2001 and contains detailed discussion of the key changes it has introduced (as at 1 March 2002). Those who are familiar with Briggs’ work in particular will appreciate the typically engaging, effective, critical and authoritative manner of the writing of this book, notwithstanding the self-effacing nature of the preface, which indicates the real difficulties in keeping up to date with this fast-moving subject. Although Briggs’ customary rant at the Europeanization of the “conflict of laws” is absent, the introduction accurately depicts “a set of jurisdictional rules, which, in their combined effect, is a minefield and a public disgrace”. The introduction also sets out the developing significance of human rights arguments for this area, particularly ECHR, Art. 6 and the right to a fair trial.

Chapter 2 is the principal chapter in the book and focuses on jurisdiction under Council Regulation (EC) No. 44/2001. This sets out the hierarchy of rules within the Regulation and provides excellent practical advice at the outset for prospective claimants and defendants. The crucial question of the international scope of the Regulation is addressed (at pp. 50–53) and the author returns later in the chapter to the related issue of the availability of the plea of forum non conveniens (pp. 214–231). These sections deal thoroughly with this problematic area, in relation to which some aspects may be clarified by anticipated rulings by the ECJ in references from the English courts in Owosu v. Jackson and others [2002] EWCA Civ 877 and American Motor Insurance Co. (Amico) v. Cellstar Operation, Cellstar (UK) Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 206.

Overall, this chapter adequately addresses the substantive issues arising under each of the jurisdictional provisions, covering all European Court jurisprudence and its application in the English courts. The critique of European jurisprudence, for instance the Leathertex ruling, and the “emasculation” of the primary purpose of Art. 5 in allocating jurisdiction to a proper forum, is clearly made and set in a practical context where one trusts, for instance, that “the defendant does not make a fuss” and simply enters an appearance, thereby affording the court jurisdiction over all claims. The debate on the interpretation in Kalfelis v. Schroder [1988] ECR 5565 in relation to the scope of “matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict” is effective although made more complicated by recent ECJ jurisprudence in Verein fur Konsumenteninformation v. Henkel and Tacconi v. Wagner (Case C-167/00, 1 October 2002 and Case C-334/00, 17 September 2002 respectively) widening the ambit of the provision. An important point stressed in this chapter is that jurisdiction under Art. 4 of the Regulation is not to be viewed as falling beyond the scope of the Regulation, and is effectively still authorized by it and limited by the rules on lis alibi pendens .

Chapter 3 ensures full coverage by briefly reviewing the Brussels and Lugano Conventions and any differences therein. Chapter 4, on the English common law rules of jurisdiction, is interesting from a Scottish perspective. Schedule 8 to the 1982 Act, as revised, effectively replicates the

544