The Court held that choice-of-law provisions in maritime contracts are presumptively enforceable as a matter of federal maritime law. It further held that while there are narrow exceptions to this rule, state public policy is not one of them.
Great Lakes in Action
On February 21, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Great Lakes Insurance SE v. Raiders Retreat Realty Co., LLC. Loyal readers will remember (see here and here and here and here) that this case presented the question of what test to apply to determine the enforceability of a choice-of-law clause governed by federal maritime law….
Continue ReadingU.S. Supreme Court Decides Great Lakes
On February 21, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision in Great Lakes Insurance SE v. Raiders Retreat Realty Company, LLC. The question presented was whether, under federal admiralty law, a choice-of-law clause in a maritime contract can be rendered unenforceable if enforcement is contrary to the “strong public policy” of the state…
Continue ReadingDrafting the Opinion in Great Lakes
Over the past six years, I have spent a lot of time thinking about choice-of-law clauses. I have written about how to interpret them, about their extraterritorial effect, about their history, and about why insurance companies frequently omit them from their policies. If a pub were ever to host a trivia night devoted to choice-of-law…
Continue Reading