In the European Re Wood Pulp case before the ECR, they chose to use the more restrictive implementation test, as opposed to the US effects tests.

  • The implementation test requires an actual effect, not just an intended effect.
  • Under the implementation test, conduct must be direct, substantial, and foreseeable for jurisdiction to be engaged.
    • That's a more restrictive standard than the US effects test.
    • However in practice, the two tests are pretty much the same.