Introduction
The evaluation of different cases in the sphere of law turns out to be an effective tool in accordance to which people’s awareness of jurisdictional law or various conflicts of laws is improved considerably. The example of the case where the conflict between Stolzenberg and Canada Trust Company is discussed helps to define the essence of multi-jurisdictional affairs that was connected to the collapse of a famous investment company, Castor Holdings, at the beginning of the 1990s. With the help of the case offered, it becomes possible to explain numerous legal problems like conflict of laws and its connection to the English judgment, the impact of Common Law rules and the existed European regime that is available for jurisdiction, the ways according to which a judgment may be analyzed, and the effectiveness of the regime of unification that is currently inherent to conflict of laws.
Purposes
The major purpose of the project is to identify the peculiarities of the case and make use of the ideas offered in order to comprehend the trends in conflict of laws rules. To achieve good results with such kind of research, it is necessary to rely on both primary and secondary sources. First, it is better to get familiarized with the conditions of the case when Mr. Stolzenberg was accused of constant frauds which aim at investing of more than $240 million. Second, it is obligatory to rely on web sources by means of which it is possible to discover what different professionals think about the chosen case and how they can apply this information in law and life. Finally, it is important to identify the steps and realize that they have to be taken accordingly.
Background
My research will be based on the case that happened in 1992 and analyzed by different people from different perspectives. In this case, Mr. Stolzenberg and the plaintiffs, Chrysler Canada Ltd addressed the court of law in order to define the scopes of the frauds done by the representatives the Castor Group and the punishment that has to be used. This situation demonstrates how public policy provisions of Brussels I may be evaded to a particular case law. The rules of Common Law and the European regime for jurisdiction need to be taken into consideration as well because English courts are characterized by a number of foreign elements and different connecting factors.
Theoretical framework and scope
One of the most effective ways that have to be chosen for this project is the interpretive perspective that usually aims at interpreting meanings, negotiations, background facts, and legal provision. The meaning of the English judgment of the case under consideration will be given, the evaluation of the conditions under which English courts may develop, and the interpretation of legal elements. The evaluation of primary and secondary sources will introduce a proper picture of the case as well as the lessons which are possible to get.
Material
First, the case itself has to be used as the main source. Second, a number of theoretical literature will help to define the essence of a conflict of law. And finally, different opinions and ideas need to be used to realize what other people think of this case and the nature of the English judgment that is usually characterized by a number of foreign elements and different connecting factors. In general, the idea to develop a project around the case sounds rather persuasive and captivating to be recognized among the others.