CO129-417 - Public Offices - 1914 — Page 239

234

:

1

Germany and Great Britain possess extra-territorial jurisdiction materially affect the question?

If "commercial domicil" were identical in

every respect with ordinary civil domicil I think it

would affect the problem, for the better opinion since

the decision in the case of Abdul Messih v.Farra

(Appeal Cases XIII 431) seems to be that an Anglo- Oriental domicil is inconsistent with membership

of an extra-territorial secerned community (see

Hall Foreign Jurisdiction of the British Crown pp.

183-184) such as the German and British communities

in Turkey, or in China.

But as Dicey points out (Conflict of Laws 2nd edition p.745) a person ma concurrently have a civil domicil in one country and a "commercial domicil"

in another whereas as is well known, so far as

-

civil domicil is concerned, a person can at each

moment of his life have one, and only one, domicil.

The fact that a person can have at one and the same time a "commercial domicil" as well as a civil

domicil is not inconsistent with the rule that he cannot at the same time have more than one civil

domicil. It merely illustrates, as Dicey again points out, that residence is different from (civil) domicil and that a person while civilly domiciled in one country may in fact reside and carry on business

in another.

In the present case assuming (exempli gratiâ) that the civil domicil of these persons is German and that they were permanently residing in Sweden for the purpose of carrying on business they would without

doubt

|