Insignificant influences of US law

Problematic developments in European liability law are often seen in relation to US liability law, with its mass torts, horrendous indemnifications and punitive damages. Is the tendency to extend European liability law therefore a sign that Europe is being Americanised in this respect as well?

Probably not, because the areas of European liability law that have been expanded in recent years relate in part to areas of law in which US liability regulations are relatively underdeveloped (liability for genetic modified organisms) and in part merely reflect the consequences of new technologies (IT-liability), altered social attitudes (protection of personality rights), peculiarities of national law (employers' liability for asbestos in France) or age-old dogmatic aberrations (that used to limit or even prevent damages for pain and suffering).

These developments have nothing to do with US influences; they are of entirely European origin. Where conditions are comparable (product liability), European liability law has up to now remained moderate.

Where European legal systems provide legal institutions comparable to punitive damages (exemplary damages in England, indemnification for violations of personality rights in Germany), these institutions have a narrowly limited area of application. Also, the amounts awarded are far lower than those set by US courts.

That is, of course, why European plaintiffs have repeatedly attempted to bring tort law cases before US courts. Threats of this nature may increase a potential defendant's readiness to negotiate. However, such attempts to "forum-shop" are seldom successful, since US courts have no interest whatsoever in conducting mass tort suits lacking any substantial connection to the US.