Provision record
Thomson Reuters · Thomson Reuters Terms · View original document ↗

Governing Law and Jurisdiction

Medium severity Medium confidence Explicit document language Common · 267 of 352 platforms
Stay ahead of the changes
Track Thomson Reuters and get the diff the day its terms change.
Share 𝕏 Share in Share 🔒 PDF
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.

Clause Stability Stable

0
Changes
3
Months Monitored
May 10, 2026
First Seen
May 22, 2026
Last Seen
This clause type exists across 1500 other provisions on other platforms.

Change history

removed Jul 14, 2026

Removal of governing law and jurisdiction clause eliminates specificity about dispute resolution venue and applicable law, creating ambiguity about where disputes would be litigated.

View full change record →

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

Tinder Medium

In the EU and EEA, the choice of Texas governing law shall not apply only where a mandatory consumer protection law explicitly prohibits such choice of law provisions.

Instacart Medium

For any claims that are not subject to arbitration...U.S. Residents: Delaware law; venue exclusively in the state or federal courts in New Castle County, Delaware

Plaid Medium

These Terms are governed by the laws of the State of California and the United States without regard to conflicts of laws provisions

See all platforms with this clause type →
▸ 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 Terms

ConductAtlas Analysis

Institutional analysis (regulatory & 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 …

Insight

Unlock the full institutional analysis

Enforcement risk, jurisdiction flags, contract triggers, and due diligence action items.

Applicable agencies

  • State Attorney General
    State AGs in California, New York, Texas, and other states can investigate violations of state consumer protection and privacy laws, including CCPA (California), SHIELD Act (New York), and equivalents.
    Who can file: Residents of states with comprehensive privacy laws — primarily California, Virginia, Colorado, Connecticut, and Utah
    What you need: Evidence of the violation, explanation of how your state rights were affected, and your account or contact information with the company
    What to expect: Outcomes vary by state. May result in investigation, enforcement action, or requirement for the company to change practices. No direct individual compensation in most cases.

    Search "[your state] attorney general consumer complaint" to find your state's direct complaint form

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/provision/CA-P-009132/governing-law-and-jurisdiction/
Accessed: Aug. 12, 2026
Permanent archival reference. Stable identifier suitable for legal filings, compliance documentation, and research citation.
Classification
Severity
Medium
Categories

Other risks in this policy

Get the research letter

Companies change their terms quietly. We read every version and catch what actually changed. One email a week on the changes that matter and what they mean.

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 267 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.