Choice of Law Methods in the Private International Law of Contract

1980 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
pp. 206-246
Author(s):  
Joost Blom
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
German Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Choice Of Law ◽  
Canadian Law ◽  
Draft Convention ◽  
The Law ◽  
Contractual Obligations

The First Part of this article outlined the choice of law methods developed by French and German law for problems relating to the substantial or essential validity of contracts, leaving aside the complicated matters of formation and capacity. This part will deal in the same way with the laws of the United States. A concluding part in the next volume of the Yearbook will deal with Anglo-Canadian law and will glance, by way of postscript, at a draft convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations that has been put forward recently by the Commission of the European Communities.

Choice of Law Methods in the Private International Law of Contract

1981 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 161-200
Author(s):  
Joost Blom
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Choice Of Law ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law ◽  
Contractual Obligations

This article examines the choice of law methods developed in four legal systems for problems relating to the substantial or essential validity of contracts. The complicated questions of formation and capacity have had to be left aside. The first two parts of this article discussed the choice of law methods used by courts in France, Germany, and the United States. This concluding part deals with the law in England and the common law jurisdictions in Canada, and also, by way of epilogue, with the recently completed European Communities Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations. Finally, some general conclusions will be offered about the patterns of law that have emerged in the course of this survey.

Part 2 National and Regional Reports, Part 2.4 Europe: Coordinated by Thomas Kadner Graziano, 44 Iceland: Icelandic Perspectives on the Hague Principles

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Þorláksson Eiríkur Elís
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Choice Of Law ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Contractual Obligations

This chapter focuses on Icelandic perspectives on the Hague Principles. The constitution of the Republic of Iceland does not contain any provisions on the principles of private international law. Moreover, there is no general act on private international law in force in Iceland. However, legislation on specific aspects of private international law, such as conflicts of the laws of contract and recognition and enforcement of foreign decisions, can be found in Icelandic law. Moreover, individual provisions on recognition and enforcement, jurisdiction, and choice of law can be found throughout Icelandic legislation. The legislative act which applies to contractual obligations in the field of private international law in Iceland is Act No 43/2000 on the law applicable to contractual obligations. There are no other acts that explicitly aim to address choice of law issues other than Act No 43/2000, but individual provisions can be found indicating the choice of law in specific areas of law; otherwise, Icelandic courts will apply general principles to the case at hand. There is currently no revision of Act No 43/2000 under discussion in Iceland.

Part 2 National and Regional Reports, Part 2.4 Europe: Coordinated by Thomas Kadner Graziano, 50 Ukraine: Ukrainian Perspectives on the Hague Principles

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vorobey Dmytro
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Choice Of Law ◽  
Rome Convention ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Law ◽  
Contractual Obligations

This chapter studies Ukrainian perspectives on the Hague Principles. Ukrainian private international law act, or formally the ‘Law of Ukraine “On Private International Law” ’ (PIL), was adopted on June 23, 2005. As per the Preamble to the PIL, it applies to ‘private [legal] relationships which are connected to one or more legal orders other than the Ukrainian legal order’. According to Article 2 of the PIL, it applies to matters of choice of law, procedural standing of foreign citizens, stateless persons and foreign legal entities, jurisdiction of Ukrainian courts in cases involving foreign parties, execution of letters rogatory, and recognition and enforcement of foreign court judgements in Ukraine. The Ukrainian private international law and specifically the PIL were influenced by the 1980 Rome Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations. Although, considering the relative novelty of the Hague Principles, the authority of the courts to refer to the Hague Principles has not been addressed by the higher Ukrainian courts, the courts have frequently referred to the international codifications of contract law such as the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts.

scholarly journals BASIC PRINCIPLES OF JURISDICTION IN PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW: THE EUROPEAN UNION, THE UNITED STATES AND ENGLAND

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Trevor C Hartley
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Products Liability ◽  
The Law

Abstract This article consists of a comparative study of the basic principles underlying the rules of jurisdiction in private international law in commercial cases in the law of the European Union, the United States and England. It considers the objectives which these rules seek to achieve (protection of the rights of the parties and respect for the interests of foreign States) and the extent to which these objectives are attained. It takes tort claims, especially in the field of products-liability, as an example and considers which system has the most exorbitant rules. It suggests explanations for the differences found.

Różne perspektywy dotyczące skutków art. 95 CISG

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Małgorzata Danuta Pohl-Michałek
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Democratic Republic ◽  
The United States ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
International Sale Of Goods ◽  
Conflict Of Law

The 1980 United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) was adopted in order to provide uniform rules governing the international sale of goods. It has already been ratified by an impressive number of 92 Contracting States, with the major trading countries taking the lead. The CISG applies to contracts for the sale of goods between parties whose places of business are in different States, where the States are CISG Contracting States (Article 1(1)(a)). Moreover, it applies to contracts for the sale of goods when the contracting parties have their places of business in different States and when the rules of private international law lead to the application of the law of a CISG Contracting State (Article 1(1)(b)). However, at the time of ratification, the prospective Contracting States are given the possibility of making additional reservations, including one set out in Article 95 CISG, which limits the application of Article 1(1)(b) of the Convention. Although there are some CISG Contracting States that initially applied the reservation but have since withdrawn it, there are still a few Contracting States where the reservation remains[1], including the two largest trading countries – China and the United States. The paper presents various approaches regarding the interpretation of the effects of the reservation set out in Article 95 CISG, which in fact challenge the principle of the uniform interpretation and application of the Convention’s provisions. The author argues that the Article 95 CISG reservation leads to increased confusion and problematic conflict of law issues that bring more chaos than benefits.   [1] The remaining Article 95 CISG Reservatory States are: Armenia, China, the Lao People's Democratic Republic, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Singapore, Slovakia and the United States of America. Information is based on the official website: https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=X-10&chapter=10 (accessed: 9.12.2019).

scholarly journals Legal substantiation of retaliatory measures of the Russian Federation to economic sanctions of the United States, European Union, and their allies

2020 ◽  
pp. 24-37
Author(s):  
Larisa Yur'evna Dobrynina ◽  
Anna Viktorovna Gubareva
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Economic Activity ◽  
Economic Sanctions ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
The Russian Federation

The authors examine the economic sanctions introduced nu the U.S., EU and their allies against the Russian Federation, as well as the legal mechanism of retaliatory measures taken by Russia on the nationwide scale. The changes in the international legal regulation derailed the vector of global development, which was bringing real freedom of economic activity. Establishment of the sanction regime by the aforementioned parties signifies a struggle for own influence, weakening of the positive trade and economic ties, as well as an attempt to institute a regime of protectionism within the international trade turnover exclusively for their own benefit. Based on the analysis of the normative-legal documents, an assessment is made on the legal legitimacy of the introduced discriminatory measures of the allies from the perspective of the norms of international law. This article presents the analysis of the positions of federal laws and other legislative bills of the Russian Federation, establishing gradual constraining countermeasures for foreign subjects in various spheres of activity. The authors substantiate the fact that introduction of retaliatory economic sanctions by the Russian Federation with regards to the United States, European Union, and their allies is directly related to the implementation of the principle of reciprocity, currently existing within private international law. It is noted that all these actions on protection from illegitimate sanctions are realized by Russia practically without participation of UN, WTO and other reputable international organizations in regulation of the “sanctions” issue. The extraterritorial measures introduced by the United States and the European Union justifies the movement of Russian into a new stage of evolution of legal regulation of the foreign economic activity, and in foreign trade – establishment of new markets in Asia, Africa and Latin America.

Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea and the Ronald Reagan Administration in the United States

Istoriya ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (11 (109)) ◽  
pp. 0
Author(s):  
German Gigolaev
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Reagan Administration ◽  
Ronald Reagan ◽  
The United States ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
White House ◽  
Draft Convention ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Law

The USA, as well as the USSR, initiated the convocation of the III UN Conference on the Law of the Sea (1973—1982). However, after the Ronald Reagan administration came to the White House, American diplomacy significantly changed its policy toward the Conference, which eventually resulted in US refusal to support the draft Convention on the Law of the Sea, which was worked out during the Conference. This behavior was in line with policy course of the Reagan administration — more aggressive than that of their predecessors. The article considers the American policy regarding Law of the Sea negotiations in the first months of Reagan's presidency, during the Tenth Session of the III UNCLOS.

Part 2 National and Regional Reports, Part 2.3 Australasia: Coordinated by Brooke Marshall, 42 New Zealand: New Zealand Perspectives on the Hague Principles

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hook Maria
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
International Law ◽  
General Position ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Choice Of Law ◽  
Legislative Reform ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Law

This chapter examines the choice of law rules that determine the law applicable to international contracts in New Zealand, comparing them to the Hague Principles. Private international law in New Zealand is still largely a common law subject, and the choice of law rules on international commercial contracts are no exception. The general position, which has been inherited from English common law, is that parties may choose the law applicable to their contract, and that the law with the closest and most real connection applies in the absence of choice. There are currently no plans in New Zealand for legislative reform, so the task of interpreting and developing the choice of law rules continues to fall to the courts. When performing this task, New Zealand courts have traditionally turned to English case law for assistance. But they may be willing, in future, to widen their scope of inquiry, given that the English rules have long since been Europeanized. It is conceivable, in this context, that the Hague Principles may be treated as a source of persuasive authority, provided they are consistent with the general principles or policies underlying the New Zealand rules.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document