Thomson Reuters · Thomson Reuters Terms · View original document ↗

Governing Law and Jurisdiction

Medium severity Medium confidence Explicitdocumentlanguage Common · 175 of 325 platforms
Share 𝕏 Share in Share 🔒 PDF
Monitor governance changes for Thomson Reuters Create a free account to receive the weekly governance digest and monitor one platform for governance changes.
Create free account No credit card required.
Document Record

What it is

Any legal dispute about the Thomson Reuters website terms must be handled under Minnesota law and in courts located in Hennepin County, Minnesota, regardless of where you are located.

This analysis describes what Thomson Reuters's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology

ConductAtlas Analysis

Why it matters (compliance & governance perspective)

If you have a legal dispute with Thomson Reuters about its website, you would need to bring that dispute in Minnesota courts under Minnesota law, which could be practically difficult and expensive for users located elsewhere, including outside the United States.

Interpretive note: Enforceability of the Minnesota forum selection clause against non-US consumers is uncertain; EU, UK, and Australian consumers may have mandatory rights to litigate in their home jurisdiction that override this contractual provision.

Consumer impact (what this means for users)

This clause effectively requires any user worldwide to litigate in Minnesota if a legal dispute arises from website use, creating a significant practical barrier to legal recourse for most individual users and users outside the United States. EU and UK consumers may have mandatory rights to litigate in their home jurisdiction under applicable consumer protection law that override this contractual choice of forum.

How other platforms handle this

Cohere Medium

This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Province of Ontario and the federal laws of Canada applicable therein, without regard to conflict of law principles. Each party irrevocably submits to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of Ontario, Canada for t...

Replit Medium

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without regard to its conflict of law principles. Any disputes not subject to arbitration shall be brought exclusively in the state or federal courts located in San Francisco County, California.

Tabnine Medium

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New York, without regard to its conflict of laws provisions. Any disputes arising out of or relating to these Terms or the Services shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the state and federal court...

See all platforms with this clause type →

Monitoring

Thomson Reuters has changed this document before.

Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 10 platforms.

Start Watcher free trial Or create a free account →
▸ View Original Clause Language DOCUMENT RECORD
"
These terms and conditions shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota, without giving effect to any principles of conflicts of law. Any action arising out of or relating to these terms and conditions shall be filed only in the state or federal courts located in Hennepin County, Minnesota.

— Excerpt from Thomson Reuters's Thomson Reuters Terms

ConductAtlas Analysis

Institutional analysis (Compliance & governance intelligence)

(1) REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Choice of law and forum selection clauses are generally enforceable in US B2B contexts but may be overridden by mandatory consumer protection provisions in the EU under the Rome I Regulation and Brussels I Recast Regulation, which protect consumers' rights to sue in their home jurisdiction and under their home country's mandatory consumer protection law. In the UK, similar protections apply post-Brexit under retained EU law principles. The FTC and State AGs may scrutinize forum selection clauses that effectively deny consumers meaningful access to legal recourse. (2) GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: Medium. Forum selection clauses requiring litigation in a single US jurisdiction are common for US-headquartered companies. The exposure arises from the global reach of the Thomson Reuters website and the potential unenforceability of this clause against EU, UK, and other non-US consumers who have mandatory home forum rights. (3) JURISDICTION FLAGS: EU consumers cannot be deprived of their home forum rights under the Brussels I Recast Regulation. UK consumers retain similar protections. Australian consumers may have equivalent protections under Australian Consumer Law. California courts have occasionally declined to enforce forum selection clauses that deprive California residents of statutory remedies. (4) CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: B2B agreements separately negotiated with Thomson Reuters may specify different governing law and forum provisions. This website terms clause applies to use of the public website only. Procurement teams negotiating formal contracts should not assume Minnesota law applies to those agreements. (5) COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: For EU and UK operations, legal teams should document that the Minnesota forum selection clause may be unenforceable against local consumers and ensure that dispute resolution mechanisms are available in compliance with local mandatory law. Any formal product agreements with EU or UK customers should include locally compliant governing law provisions.

Full compliance analysis

Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.

Track 1 platform — free Try Watcher free for 14 days

Free: track 1 platform + weekly digest. Watcher: 10 platforms + same-day alerts. No credit card required.

Applicable agencies

  • State AG
    State attorneys general in jurisdictions outside Minnesota may have authority over forum selection clauses that effectively deny consumers meaningful legal recourse under local consumer protection law
    File a complaint →

Provision details

Document information
Document
Thomson Reuters Terms
Entity
Thomson Reuters
Document last updated
May 5, 2026
Tracking information
First tracked
May 10, 2026
Last verified
May 10, 2026
Record ID
CA-P-009132
Document ID
CA-D-00719
Evidence Provenance
Source URL
Wayback Machine
Content hash (SHA-256)
7b62afd0f2fe4dc9527570b7cc142b17655cb2b1fe07c360fd3694462cf5d2d7
Analysis generated
May 10, 2026 14:55 UTC
Methodology
Evidence
✓ Snapshot stored   ✓ Hash verified
Citation Record
Entity: Thomson Reuters
Document: Thomson Reuters Terms
Record ID: CA-P-009132
Captured: 2026-05-10 14:55:32 UTC
SHA-256: 7b62afd0f2fe4dc9…
URL: https://conductatlas.com/platform/thomson-reuters/thomson-reuters-terms/governing-law-and-jurisdiction/
Accessed: May 13, 2026
Permanent archival reference. Stable identifier suitable for legal filings, compliance documentation, and research citation.
Classification
Severity
Medium
Categories

Other risks in this policy

Professional Governance Intelligence

Need to monitor specific governance provisions?

Professional includes provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, regulatory mapping, and audit-ready analysis.

Arbitration clauses AI governance Data rights Indemnification Retention policies
Start Professional free trial

Or start with Watcher →

Built from archived source documents, structured governance mappings, and historical version tracking.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does Thomson Reuters's Governing Law and Jurisdiction clause do?

If you have a legal dispute with Thomson Reuters about its website, you would need to bring that dispute in Minnesota courts under Minnesota law, which could be practically difficult and expensive for users located elsewhere, including outside the United States.

How does this clause affect you?

This clause effectively requires any user worldwide to litigate in Minnesota if a legal dispute arises from website use, creating a significant practical barrier to legal recourse for most individual users and users outside the United States. EU and UK consumers may have mandatory rights to litigate in their home jurisdiction under applicable consumer protection law that override this contractual …

How many platforms have this type of clause?

ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 175 platforms. See the full comparison.

Is ConductAtlas affiliated with Thomson Reuters?

No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Thomson Reuters.