Conflict of lawsAssignment of marine insurance policy governed by Rome Convention - notice of assignment served on French insurers in France failing to follow requirements of French law - assignee's claim to be determined by English lawRaiffeisen Zentralbank Osterreich AG v Five Star General Trading LLC and others: QBD (Longmore J): 26 May 2000The owners of a vessel executed a notice of assignment of an insurance policy taken out on their vessel in favour of the claimant bank and sent it to French insurers through an insurance broker, instead of serving it through a French bailiff as required by French law.The proceeds of sale of the vessel were insufficient to meet several claims.

In an action against the owners, insurers and cargo owners, the bank sought a summary declaration that it was the lawful owner of the insurance policy which had been validly assigned to it.The cargo owners contended that the assignment was invalid since under the Rome Convention the notice of assignment involved a transfer of property and as such the relief claimed was a proprietary claim which was governed by lex situs, in this case French law.Jeffrey Gruder QC (instructed by Stephenson Harwood) for the bank.

Alexander Layton QC and Michael Davey (instructed by Howard Kennedy) for the cargo owners.Held, giving judgment for the bank, that the assignment was an assignment of a contractual obligation and, as a matter of English law, the Rome Convention should apply to any assignment of contract unless, on its wording, such an application was inappropriate; that the application of the Rome Convention did not depend on the way in which one phrased the relevant question for the characterisation of the issues before the court; and that, since insurers and insured had agreed for the insurance contract to be governed by English law, the assignment should also be governed by English law, which did not require a notice of assignment to be given in any formal manner.