The Interest Approach to Choice of Law

I. The Traditional Approach to Choice of Law.- A. The General Theory.- 1. Jurisprudential underpinnings: Territorial Sovereignty, Legislative Jurisdiction and Vested Rights.- 2 Internationalism and Universalism.- 3. System-pointing rules — the systematics of broad categories and “connecting factors”.- 4. Asserted policy bases — uniformity of result and ease of application.- B. The Gap between Judicial Doing and Reasoning — “Escape Devices”.- C. Critical Evaluation of the Traditional Approach.- D. The Traditional Tort Choice-of-Law Rules.- 1. In the United States.- 2. In England.- 3. In the Continent of Europe and other Countries.- II. Three Preliminary Clarifications: Transnational Versus Interstate Conflicts, the Lex Fori Threshold and Foreign Law as Factual Datum.- A. Transnational Versus Interstate Conflicts.- 1. The transnational-interstate dichotomy.- a. The impact of constitutional mandates.- b. The factor of mutuality, reciprocity and sense of unity.- c. The scope of substantive diversity among different laws.- d. The practical possibility of forum shopping.- e. The feasibility of substantive law unification.- f. The frequency and subject-matter of conflict-of-laws litigation.- 2. Seperate methodological treatment of interstate and transnational conflicts?.- B. The Lex Fori Threshold.- 1. Introductory note.- 2. The Case against a lex fori threshold — “forum shopping”.- a. Facts and fancies of the forum shopping phenomenon.- b. The correctives of jurisdictional reform and forum non conveniens.- 3. The case for a lex fori threshold.- a. Simplicity, economy and efficiency.- b. Justice and reason under law.- c. Jurisprudential premise — presumption as to the prima facie functional reach of domestic legal rules.- 4. Some specific features of a lex fori threshold in cases involving foreign elements.- a. “Sophisticated” lex fori.- b. Lex fori as sole candidate or last resort.- C. Foreign Law as Factual Datum.- III. The Concept of Public and Private Interests in the Choice-of-Law — Process — Perspectives and Values.- A. The Concept of Public Interests.- 1. Fundamental Jurisprudential underpinnings.- 2. The “interest” trend in choice of law — a brief historical sketch.- 3. Public interests — a comprehensive view.- B. The Concept of Private Interests.- 1. The “justice in the particular case” dilemma.- 2. The principle of rational connection between parties and laws.- a. The “submission and consent” fallacy.- b. The “foreseeability” and “vindication of justified expectations” desideratum.- c. The “equitable responsibility to ascertain foreign law” consideration.- d. The “reasonable reliance” criterion.- e. The “fair notice” rationale.- 3. The assessment of private interests as a coherent part of the process of interest analysis.- C. An Interest-based Approach — The Values of Judicial Creativity, Concretization and Rationality, “Domestication” of the Choice Process and Functionalism in lieu of Territorialism.- 1. Judicial creativity.- 2. Rationality in terms of concrete rules and consequences.- 3. “Domestication” of the choice of law process.- 4. Functionalism in lieu of territorialism.- IV. Public Interests Peculiar to Conflicts Contexts: Transnational Concerns.- A. The Concept of Transnational Concerns.- B. Transnational Concerns in Reciprocal Accommodation of Public Interests and Uniform Treatment of Distinctive Problem-Areas.- 1. Reciprocal accommodation of public interests.- a. Moderate delineation of public interests.- b. Harmonization of compatible public interests.- c. Facilitation of commonly desired transnational activity.- d. Mutual assistance in the handling of foreign law.- 2. Uniform treatment of distinctive problem-areas.- a. The traditional desiderata of predictability and uniformity-fancies and facts.- b. Uniformity of results — a discriminatory approach.- V. The Process of Interest Analysis-Ascertainment of Relevant Interests.- A. Ordinary and Peculiar Aspects of the Interpretive Function.- B. Factors and Guidelines in the Ascertainment of Relevant Interests.- 1. Initial identification of potentially concerned jurisdictions.- 2. Enlightenment in the ascertainment of relevant interests.- 3. The putative interest dilemma.- 4. The realistic and timely coincidence of rule-supporting purposes and relevant connecting-factors.- 5. The pitfall of eclectic combination of interests.- C. Practical Complexities in the Ascertainment of Relevant Interests.- 1. The general problem.- 2. Some mitigating considerations.- 3. The procedural aspects of foreign law ascertainment.- VI. The Process of Interest Analysis-Elimination and Resolution of Conflicts of Interests.- A. Elimination of Apparent-but-not-real Conflicts of Interests.- 1. The concept of illusory, false and avoidable conflicts.- 2. The substance-procedure dichotomy revisited.- B. Resolution of True Conflicts of Interests.- 1. The general dilemma.- 2. The invariable recourse to the lex fori solution.- 3. Rational guiding considerations — the respective strength and merits of conflicting interests.- a. Choice in terms of the relative strength of conflicting interests.- b. Choice in terms of the relative merits of conflicting interests.- C. Recourse to the Lex Fori as a Last Resort in Conflicts Adjudication.- VII. The Prospects of Standardization in the Process of Interest Analysis.- A. New Choice-of-Law Standards — Fancies and Facts.- 1. The illusions of Ehrenzweig’s “true” rules.- 2. The ambiguities of the “most significant relationship” formula of the Restatement Second.- 3. The shortcomings of Cavers’ “principles of preference”.- B. Avenues of Standardization: Accumulation of Interest-Analyses Data, Judicial and Legislative Scope-Delimitation of Legal Prescriptions, and International Legislation in Distinctive Problem-Areas.- 1. Accumulation of interest-analyses data.- 2. Judicial and legislative scope-delimitation of legal prescriptions.- 3. International legislation in distinctive problem-areas.- Appendix. An Exercise in Interest Analysis.- Selected Bibliography.- General Index.