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
- 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.