## Facts

- An Illinois resident was injured during a hunting safari in Mozambique arranged and conducted by a Mozambican safari company.
- The plaintiff sued in federal court under diversity jurisdiction, seeking tort damages.
- The defendant moved to apply Mozambican law to (1) liability/standard of care and (2) damages, and asked the court to determine Mozambican law under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 44.1.
- Materials presented indicated Mozambican fault rules differed from Illinois negligence rules, including a standard judging fault by the diligence expected of a “law-abiding male head of a family.”

## Issues

1. Under Illinois conflict-of-laws principles applicable in diversity, should Mozambican or Illinois substantive law govern the defendant’s tort liability for injuries occurring in Mozambique?
2. Under the same principles, should Mozambican or Illinois substantive law govern the measure of damages?
3. May the court determine the content of Mozambican law as a legal question under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 44.1 based on the parties’ submissions?

## Decision

- The court applied Illinois conflict-of-laws rules because it sat in diversity in Illinois.
- The court found a genuine conflict between Illinois and Mozambican substantive rules relevant to liability and damages.
- Applying Illinois’s “most significant relationship” approach for torts, the court concluded Mozambique had the more significant relationship to both liability and damages because the injury and the regulated conduct occurred there.
- The court granted the motion to apply Mozambican law to liability and damages and proceeded to determine Mozambican law under Rule 44.1.

## Legal Principles

- A federal court sitting in diversity applies the forum state’s conflict-of-laws rules.
- Under Illinois tort choice-of-law doctrine, the law of the place of injury generally governs unless Illinois has a more significant relationship with the occurrence and the parties for the issue being decided.
- When foreign law differs from forum law on the relevant issues, a court must evaluate contacts and governmental interests to select the governing law.
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 44.1 permits a court to determine foreign law as a question of law, based on notice and appropriate materials, rather than submitting foreign-law content to the jury as a fact question.
- In an international tort, the place-of-injury presumption can result in application of a foreign country’s substantive law to both liability and damages.

## Conclusion

The court held that, under Illinois conflict-of-laws rules applicable in diversity, Mozambican substantive law governed both liability and damages for an injury sustained on a Mozambique safari, and it determined Mozambican law under Rule 44.1 as a legal question.


Pancotto v. Sociedade de Safaris de Mocambique, S.A.R.L., 422 F. Supp. 405 (N.D. Ill. 1976)