What are the rules governing conflicts of laws in international litigation?

In South Dakota, conflicts of laws in international litigation are governed by the Uniform Conflict of Laws Act. This act sets forth rules for determining which state’s laws will be enforced in a particular dispute. When resolving an international dispute, courts must consider the legal relationships between the parties, the contacts between the parties and the states, the interests of the affected states, and the policy of the state where the lawsuit is filed. The important factor in determining which state’s laws will be used is the center of gravity or grouping of the most significant contacts, known as the “most significant relationship” test. This test looks at the extent to which the parties have connected with the state, including the facts of the dispute, the place of the parties’ contacts and negotiable terms, the places of negotiation, formation, and performance of the contract, and the place where the contract was intended to be performed. When a state’s law is chosen, the court will also consider the applicable statutes and judicially noticed procedures of that state. The court will then apply the chosen state’s governmental interests test to decide if the state has an interest in the dispute and if its laws should be applied. If so, then the court will apply the chosen state’s law. The Uniform Conflict of Laws Act also permits the parties to a contract to choose the applicable law independent of the tests mentioned above. This is known as a forum selection clause and is popular in international litigation. In this instance, the parties can agree before the dispute arises which state’s laws should apply. This allows more legal certainty for the parties by allowing them to agree ahead of time which state’s laws will be used in their dispute.

What are the rules governing conflicts of laws in international litigation?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts