The Court of Appeal’s recent decision is another blow for litigants who hope that foreign law will allow them to escape from liability under English law contracts. This case, Dexia Crediop SpA v Comune di Prato  EWCA Civ 428 (15 June 2017) arose from a claim by Dexia (the Bank) for some EUR 6.5 million due under an interest rate swap. The contract was subject to English law and jurisdiction.
The defendant, an Italian local authority (Prato), sought to rely on various Italian law arguments. Not one arrow in Prato’s “capacious quiver”  of defences struck home, however. The result of Walker J’s judgments was basically reversed.
The case demonstrates how hard it is to show that “mandatory” rules of foreign law should apply (due to Article 3(3) of the Rome Convention) where parties have expressly chosen English law. The 2016 Banco Santander case (discussed in my post on Blair J’s March judgment and the Court of Appeal’s December decision) covered similar ground but this case is more extreme. Continue reading