Search

The article discusses the application by U.S. federal courts of rule 44.1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in the litigation of foreign law, including the factors adversely affecting the rule's utilization like the use of expert testimony.

The article reflects on the U.S. Seventh Circuit case, Bodum USA Inc. v. La Cafetière Inc., which argues that judges should restrict themselves to judicial research. It mentions that usually U.S. judges are required to interpret the laws of a foreign nation to resolve the controversy. It suggests that goal should be to expand the options available to judges for proof of foreign law questions.