Choice of Law

When a dispute has a connection to more than one jurisdiction, and when the laws of those jurisdictions are materially different, a court must perform a choice-of-law analysis to determine which law to apply. To make this determination, a court will typically apply the choice-of-law rules of the jurisdiction in which it sits. Although choice-of-law rules vary significantly across U.S. states, many courts look to the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws for guidance. The American Law Institute is currently in the process of drafting the Restatement (Third) of Conflict of Laws.

Recent Posts

CISG Opt-Outs and Ascertaining Party Intent: A Back-to-Basics Perspective

Two of this year’s contributions to Transnational Litigation Blog have addressed the intellectually stimulating but also practically pressing issue of identifying when, and how, commercial parties can exclude the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods from their international sales agreements. In Professor John Coyle’s CISG Opt-Outs and Party Intent, Professor…

Continue Reading

The PDVSA Bonds, Autocracy, and the Venezuelan Constitution

The Second Circuit’s recent decision in Petróleos de Venezuela S.A. v. MUFG Union Bank, N.A. certified a number of choice-of-law questions to the New York Court of Appeals. The decision to certify, which had the effect of postponing a definitive resolution of the dispute, was previously discussed at TLB here and here. In this post, I focus…

Continue Reading

More on the Validity of the PDVSA 2020 Bonds

Governments with no realistic prospect of paying their debts often gamble for redemption, trying desperately to avoid default. Political leaders, with good reason, fear that a debt default will get them thrown out of office. But in trying to hold power, sometimes by borrowing even more, they often make matters worse for the country and…

Continue Reading