Key Takeaways

  • Conflict of laws (also called private international law) deals with resolving disputes when multiple jurisdictions’ laws could apply.
  • Common issues include determining jurisdiction, identifying which law applies, and enforcing judgments across borders.
  • Differences arise not only between nations but also between U.S. states, especially in areas like contracts, torts, or family law.
  • Courts rely on “choice of law” principles, such as party autonomy, public policy exceptions, and fairness considerations.
  • Recent debates (e.g., post-Dobbs abortion cases) highlight how conflict of laws interacts with cultural and political divides.
  • Arbitration often introduces additional complexities, requiring careful selection of governing law and seat of arbitration.

Conflict of law rules definition, which is also known as private international law, refers to how resolution is brought about when there are conflicting laws, based upon jurisdiction. This term “conflict of law” is largely used in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom, whereas private international law is the verbiage most commonly used in other countries. Additionally, the term conflict of law is referring to those laws that are specifically national (meaning that they are specific to a particular nation) and not within the scope of international law.

When Might Conflict of Law Occur?

These conflicts may arise as the result of differences in laws between states, state law versus federal law, or United States law versus the laws of other countries or territories. Particularly within conflict of law on an international scale, the laws of each country are essentially a reflection upon that society's values. As such, the laws from one country to another can be quite different. In addition to the issues surrounding the differences in laws from one country to the next, it can also create debate around jurisdiction should a legal issue arise, as all of the localities involved may try to claim jurisdiction.

It is worth noting that this can commonly occur within different states in the United States, who adhere to different laws on certain issues, such as capital punishment. When issues of conflict of law arise in the United States, between states that have different laws, the same questions, below, are required to be applied, per a ruling by the United States Supreme Court.

The questions that must be addressed in conflict of law are:

  • Which country’s court has jurisdiction when a legal matter arises that involves more than one country?
  • What law is going to be applied to the particular issue, once the proper court has been determined? (This is frequently called “classification” or “characterization.”)
  • How will the court enforce the judgment, should the case be settled in favor of the plaintiff?

These can all be complex questions, without easy answers, especially depending upon the nature of the crime that was committed. For example, some countries are adamantly opposed to capital punishment, and therefore may seek to have jurisdiction, if the other country involved is one that practices capital punishment. Additionally, issues of national pride may arise when fighting for jurisdiction if the crime committed was one that caused a great deal of embarrassment to a certain country.

Principles of Choice of Law

When courts face a conflict of laws, they must decide which jurisdiction’s rules govern the dispute. To do this, they apply “choice of law” principles. Some common methods include:

  • Lex loci contractus – applying the law where a contract was formed.
  • Lex loci delicti – applying the law of the place where the tort occurred.
  • Most significant relationship test – weighing connections such as the parties’ domiciles, the place of performance, or where the harm occurred.
  • Party autonomy – giving effect to the parties’ agreed choice of governing law, unless it violates fundamental policy.

These approaches demonstrate how courts balance predictability with fairness. For example, a U.S. court may uphold a contract clause selecting English law, unless applying it would contravene strong U.S. public policy.

Differing Legal Systems

As explored, conflict of law occurs due to differing laws from one jurisdiction to the next. This commonly occurs when one country adheres to a common-law tradition, and the other adheres to a civil law tradition. For example, when it comes to contract law, there is no existing counterpart from civil law to common law.

Even among countries who have similar legal traditions, there can be marked differences. For example, while the United States and the United Kingdom are both common-law countries, and some of the methodologies may be quite similar, the laws that govern both nations may be quite different regarding how they are abided and executed. Germany and Switzerland are yet other examples of countries who have similar law traditions, thus similar methodology, but ultimate differences in the laws themselves.

Additionally, there may be marked differences even among those countries that are all considered to have a civil law tradition, depending upon whether they are considered Germanic, Nordic or Roman-Franco. For example, in Germany, laws are far more subjective when it comes to who is defined as a merchant, as it basically depends upon the individual and the situation. Meanwhile, in France, the laws are much more objective, meaning that the merchant is essentially defined by the particular transaction with which they are involved.

There are also many differences that exist between countries as to whether or not someone who could be identified as a “good faith purchaser” can obtain the title to stolen goods. Italy, for example, does permit the purchaser to obtain the title, provided they were unaware that the goods were stolen (hence, “good faith purchaser”), whereas countries such as Germany and Portugal do not. Meanwhile, countries such as France and Netherlands attempt to take a more holistic approach and allow the original owner to regain possession of their goods, but sometimes it is expected that the good faith purchaser be compensated for this.

Conflict of law, whether within the United States, or among different countries, can raise a lot of questions regarding jurisdiction, sentencing, and enforcement.

Enforcement of Foreign Judgments

A central challenge in conflict of laws is ensuring that judgments are enforceable across jurisdictions. Courts typically follow these considerations:

  1. Recognition of Judgments – Many jurisdictions will honor foreign judgments if the original court had proper jurisdiction and due process was observed.
  2. Public Policy Exception – Courts may refuse enforcement if the judgment contradicts local public policy. For instance, a foreign ruling enforcing a gambling debt may be denied in a jurisdiction where gambling contracts are void.
  3. International Treaties – Some regions rely on conventions, such as the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements, which provide clearer enforcement standards.

In arbitration, enforcement is aided by the New York Convention, which obligates signatory states to recognize foreign arbitral awards with limited exceptions.

Modern Challenges in Conflict of Laws

Contemporary legal disputes increasingly involve politically charged or cross-border issues. For example, after the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, conflict of laws principles have been tested in cases where individuals seek reproductive healthcare in states with different legal regimes. Some states have passed laws attempting to restrict residents from accessing out-of-state procedures, raising difficult enforcement questions.

Similarly, global commerce and digital interactions complicate jurisdictional boundaries. Online contracts, cross-border data transfers, and multinational supply chains often require courts to weigh which jurisdiction has the closest connection to the dispute. This evolving landscape underscores the need for adaptable conflict of laws rules that protect both fairness and predictability.

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. What is the main purpose of conflict of laws?
    It ensures that when multiple jurisdictions could apply to a case, courts can determine which forum and legal system should govern the dispute.
  2. How do courts decide which law applies in a conflict of laws case?
    They use principles such as place of contract, place of harm, most significant relationship, or the parties’ choice of law.
  3. Can parties choose the law that governs their contract?
    Yes, most legal systems honor party autonomy, though courts may reject the choice if it violates public policy.
  4. Are foreign judgments always enforceable?
    Not always. Courts may refuse enforcement if the original court lacked jurisdiction, due process was denied, or enforcement would violate local policy.
  5. How does arbitration affect conflict of laws?
    Arbitration agreements often specify governing law and the seat of arbitration. The New York Convention helps ensure awards are recognized internationally.

If you need help with conflict of law definitions, you can post your legal need on UpCounsel’s marketplace. UpCounsel accepts only the top 5 percent of lawyers to its site. Lawyers on UpCounsel come from law schools such as Harvard Law and Yale Law and average 14 years of legal experience, including work with or on behalf of companies like Google, Menlo Ventures, and Airbnb.