….which includes offering some proceedings in English. Part of the Continent’s comparative advantage apparently involves the time necessary to conduct their affairs and certify rulings:
When signing deals, companies typically agree on the jurisdiction that will hear potential disputes, and London became a leading destination because of its role as the capital of global finance and because its rulings are valid across the European Union—an advantage that could evaporate once Britain leaves the bloc. “London is stepping into the shadows,” says Roman Poseck, president of the appeals court in Frankfurt, where officials plan to have an English-language panel in place by January. “Frankfurt wants a piece of the pie.”
The Europeans say theirs are faster and cheaper than British courts, in part because they allow many proceedings to be conducted via written briefs. In London, virtually all arguments must be made orally, which takes time and adds to billable hours. And after Britain leaves the bloc, the Europeans say they’ll offer speedier decisions in cases that require fast action—say, the seizing of assets that might be spirited out of the country. While London rulings could still stand across the EU, they’ll likely need to be certified by a national court of an EU member, which will inevitably slow things down. Companies once chose London “as a matter of reflex,” says Peter Bert, a lawyer at Taylor Wessing in Frankfurt who’s also admitted as a solicitor in England. “We don’t see that anymore. There’s much more reflection before making a choice.”
The Bloomberg story is here.