European UnionI was injured in a country whose law gives lower damages than my home country. Which law applies?
In cross-border personal injury cases within the EU, the law of the country where the harm occurred usually applies — but you may choose the law of your habitual residence if the tortfeasor could reasonably foresee you'd be affected there.
What the Law Says
The applicable law for non-contractual obligations — including personal injury — in cross-border EU cases is governed by Regulation (EC) No 864/2007, known as 'Rome II'. It determines which country’s substantive law applies, regardless of where the court is located.
Under Rome II, the general rule is that the law of the country where the damage occurs applies — this includes both the place where the injury happened and the place where the direct consequences were suffered (e.g., medical treatment or loss of income in your home country).
However, Article 14 allows parties to agree on a different governing law *after* the event causing damage — though this is rarely used in personal injury cases involving individuals.
Importantly, Article 4(3) provides an exception: if the case shows a 'manifestly closer connection' with another country (e.g., both parties habitually reside there, or the tortfeasor targeted victims there), that country’s law may apply instead.
For product liability specifically (e.g., injury from a defective good), Article 6 says the law of the injured person’s habitual residence applies — *if* the product was marketed there with the manufacturer’s consent.
Statutory TextThe law applicable to a non-contractual obligation arising out of a tort/delict shall be the law of the country in which the damage occurs.
— Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 (Rome II), Art. 4(1)
Statutory TextWhere a non-contractual obligation arises out of damage caused by a product, the law applicable shall be the law of the country in which the person sustaining damage had his habitual residence at the time the damage occurred.
— Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 (Rome II), Art. 6(1)
What Courts Have Said
EU courts have clarified how Rome II’s rules interact with national procedural rules and the meaning of 'damage' and 'habitual residence'.
The CJEU held that 'the country in which the damage occurs' under Art. 4(1) refers to the place where the direct damage is suffered — not where indirect consequences (e.g., financial loss) arise — affirming territoriality as the default anchor.
The CJEU confirmed that 'habitual residence' under Art. 6 must be assessed factually and stably — not merely temporary presence — and that marketing a product in a Member State triggers Art. 6’s special rule.
What to Do
Identify where the injury physically occurred and where its direct consequences (e.g., hospitalisation, disability onset) were first felt.
Check whether the defendant marketed a product in your home country — if yes, Art. 6 Rome II may let you apply your home law.
Gather evidence of habitual residence (e.g., registration, tax records, lease) if relying on Art. 6 or Art. 4(3).
Consult a lawyer qualified in both jurisdictions — choice-of-law decisions are binding and cannot be changed later.
File your claim in a court with jurisdiction (e.g., where the defendant is domiciled or where harm occurred) — remember: Rome II governs *which law applies*, not *which court hears the case*.
Sources
Not legal advice. This article is general information based on publicly available sources, written for educational purposes. Laws change and individual situations vary. Consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before acting on anything you read here. Last reviewed: 2026-06-08.