Smith is an Australian national who is domiciled in Indonesia. While operating a motor vehicle in the State of California, he is involved in a motor vehicle accident with Brown who is a Canadian but who is a permanent resident of California. Smith and Brown are both injured and each of them claims that the other negligently caused the accident.

Q) Smith commences legal proceedings against Brown in the Supreme Court of NSW because at the time both parties are present in Sydney and Brown does not object to jurisdiction. However Brown brings an application to stay alleging forum non conveniens. As part of the Forum non conveniens application, Brown argues that the matter is governed by foreign law. Assuming that the laws of all jurisdictions are different, what is the likely outcome of the Supreme Court's choice of law analysis?

A.

The NSW Court will apply the rule that the place of the injury governs and therefore this should be a matter for the substantive law of California.

B.

The NSW Court will look to the place of injury (California) and will apply the whole law of the State of California which requires the NSW Court to decide choice of law as would a court in California.

C.

Under the terms of the Australian - American free trade act, Australia will apply its own law in cases involving an Australian national.

D.

The NSW Court will look to the place of the tort which appears to be California and will apply the substantive law of California.

E.

The NSW Court will apply its own choice of law rules - the law of the place of the tort - which is likely California and will then; apply the whole law of the State of California including its choice of law rules.

Q) In the event that the NSW Court elects to apply the law of California:

A.

The Australian Court must only look to the substantive law of California because California is a non-renvoi jurisdiction.

B.

The Australian Court will look at the whole law of California and must perform a California choice of law analysis.

C.

The Australian Court in performing a choice of law analysis under California law will need to look at the law of the place of the tort because California is also a common law jurisdiction.

D.

Assuming that Indonesia is a civil law jurisdiction, this is a further complication to the Australian court's analysis because traditionally the civil law countries only allow single renvoi which is contrary to the American position.