The Impact of Brainerd Currie’s Governmental Interest on the Principle of the Closest Connection

In modern private international law, the principle of the closest connection involves not only the identification of the prevailing territorial connection, but also the consideration of substantive factors (protection of a weaker party, preferability to keep the transaction valid, etc.). The paper substantiates the thesis that, being initially based on the territorial localization of the relationship, the analyzed principle in the course of its development was enhanced with the achievements of others doctrinal approaches to the resolution of the conflict-of-law issue, including the concept of “governmental” or “state” interest developed by American legal scholar Brainerd Currie. A genius breakthrough suggested by B. Currie is examined as an attempt to overcome the mechanical approach of conflict-of-law rules, expand the subject matter field of assessment at the stage of resolving the conflict-o-law issue and, ultimately, evaluate the substantive law result of this decision within the framework of understanding law as a tool for the protection of an individual by the state. Nevertheless, substantive law factors, contrary to one of the main tenets of B. Currie’s teaching, do not replace traditional conflict-of-laws rules at all. To the extent that the conflict-of-law regulation mechanism balances predictability and flexibility of decisions, it complements the search for territorial connection with substantive law considerations. The research makes it possible to conclude that the principle of the closest connection in private international law of the Russian Federation, in the context of global trends in the development of approaches to the resolution of conflict-of-law issues, is complex in nature, as indicated by the explanation of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation that “when determining the closest connection, the court,” first, establishes ”the prevailing territorial connection” and, second, “may take into account the application of the law of which country will best realize the universally recognized principles of civil law and of its institutions.” As a consequence, it is the combination of territorial and substantive law components in the content of the principle of the closest connection that provides an appropriate balance between predictability and flexibility of the modern mechanism of conflict-of-law regulation.

1. Asoskov AV. Kollizionnoe regulirovanie dogovornykh obyazatelstv [Conflict-of-Laws Regulation of Contractual Obligations]. Moscow: M-Logos Publ.; 2017. (In Russ.)

2. Asoskov AV. Normoobrazuyushchie faktory, vliyayushchie na soderzhanie kollizionnogo regulirovaniya dogovornykh obyazatelstv : dis. ... d-ra yurid. nauk [Rule-forming factors influencing the content of the conflict-of-law regulation of contractual obligations: Doctoral Dissertation]. Moscow; 2011. (In Russ.)

3. Bulanov VV. Kategoriya naibolee tesnoy svyazi v mezhdunarodnom chastnom prave : dis. ... kand. yurid. nauk [The category of the closest connection in private international law: Cand. Sci. (Law) Thesis). Moscow; 2012. (In Russ.)

4. Lunts LA. Kurs mezhdunarodnogo chastnogo prava. Obshchaya chast [Course of private international law. General part]. Moscow: Yuridicheskaya literatura Publ.; 1973. (In Russ.)

5. Monastyrskiy YuE. Gospodstvuyushchie doktriny kollizionnogo prava v ssha : dis. ... kand. yurid. nauk [The dominant doctrines of conflict of law in the USA: Cand. Sci. (Law) Thesis]. Moscow; 1999. (In Russ.).

6. Trubetskoy EN. Lektsii po entsiklopedii prava [Lectures on Law Encyclopedia]. Moscow: Partnership of A. I. Mamontov Printing House; 1917. (In Russ.)

7. Khodykin RM. Printsipy i faktory formirovaniya soderzhaniya kollizionnykh norm v mezhdunarodnom chastnom prave : dis. ... kand. yurid. nauk [Principles and factors of formation of the content of conflict-oflaw rules in private international law: Cand. Sci. (Law) Thesis].Moscow; 2005. (In Russ.)

8. Shulakov A.A Printsip naibolee tesnoy svyazi v mezhdunarodnom chastnom prave : dis. ... kand. yurid. nauk [The principle of the closest connection in private international law: Cand. Sci. (Law) Thesis]. Moscow; 2013. (In Russ.)

9. Banu R. Nineteenth-Century Perspectives on Private International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2018.

10. Baxter WF. Choice of Law and the Federal System. Stanford Law Abstract. 1963;16(1):1-42.

11. Brilmayer L. Interest Analysis and the Myth of Legislative Intent. Michigan Law Abstract. 1980;78:392-431.

12. Brilmayer L, Anglin R. Choice of Law Theory and the Metaphysics of the Stand-Alone Trigger. Iowa Law Abstract. 2010;95:1125-1178.

13. Brilmayer L, Goldsmith J, O’Hara O’Connor E, Vázquez C M. Conflict of Laws: Cases and Materials. 8th ed. Wolters Kluwer; 2020.

14. Brownlie I. Principles of Public International Law. 7th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2008.

15. Cavers DF. Contemporary Conflicts Law in American Perspective. Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law. Vol. 131, 1970-III. Leyde: A. W. Sijthoff; 1971: 75-308.

16. Currie B. Married Women’s Contracts: A Study in Conflict-of-Laws Method. The University of Chicago Law Abstract. 1958;25(2):227-268.

17. Currie B. Notes on Methods and Objectives in the Conflict of Laws. Duke Law Journal. 1959;1959(2):171-181.

18. Currie B. Selected Essays on the Conflict of Laws. Durham: Duke University Press; 1963.

19. Currie B. The Verdict of Quiescent Years: Mr. Hill and the Conflict of Laws. The University of Chicago Law Abstract. 1961;28:258-295.

20. Dane P. Vested Rights, «Vestedness» and Choice of Law. The Yale Law Journal. 1987;96(6):1191-1275.

21. Griswold E N. David F. Cavers. Law and Contemporary Problems. 1988;51(3)(I-IV).

22. Juenger F. K. Conflict of Laws: A Critique of Interest Analysis. The American Journal of Comparative Law. 1984;32(1):1-50.

23. Kay H. H. A Defense of Currie’s Governmental Interest Analysis. Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law. Vol. 215, 1989-III. Dordrecht; Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers;1990.

24. Kegel G. Lipstein K., editor. Fundamental Approaches in Private International Law of International Encyclopedia of Comparative Law (Vol. III). Dordrecht; Boston; Lancaster: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers; Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck); 1986.

25. Korn HL. The Choice-of-Law Revolution: A Critique. Columbia Law Abstract. 1983;83(4):772-973.

26. Kramer L. Interest Analysis and the Presumption of Forum Law. The University of Chicago Law Abstract. 1989;56:1301-1310.

27. Kramer L. More Notes on Methods and Objectives in the Conflict of Laws. Cornell International Law Journal. 1991;24(2):245-278.

28. Leflar RA. Conflicts Law: More on Choice-Influencing Considerations. California Law Abstract. 1966;54:1584-1598.

29. von Mehren AT. Recent Trends in Choice-Of-Law Methodology. Cornell Law Abstract. 1975;60(6):927-968.

30. Ratner JR. Using Currie’s Interest Analysis to Resolve Conflicts Between State Regulation and the Sherman Act. William and Mary Law Abstract. 1989;30(4):705-786.

31. Reynolds WL, Richman WM. Robert Leflar, Judicial Process and Choice of Law. Arkansas Law Abstract. 1999;52:123-140.

32. Roosevelt K. III. Brainerd Currie’s Contribution to Choice of Law: Looking Back, Looking Forward. Mercer Law Abstract. 2014;65:501-520.

33. Sedler RA. The Governmental Interest Approach to Choice of Law: An Analysis and a Reformulation. UCLA Law Abstract. 1977;25:181-243.

34. Shaw MN. International Law. 6th ed. New York: Cambridge University Pres; 2008.

35. Simson GJ. Choice of Law After the Currie Revolution: What Role for the Needs of the Interstate and International Systems? Mercer Law Abstract. 2012;63:715-749.

36. Symeonides SC. American Private International Law. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International; 2008.

37. Symeonides SC. The American Choice-of-Law Revolution in the Courts: Today and Tomorrow. Collected Courses of The Hague Academy of International Law. Vol. 298; 2002; Leiden/Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers; 2003.

38. Symeonides SC. The Choice of Law Revolution Fifty Years After Currie: An End and A Beginning. University of Illinois Law Abstract. 2015;2015(5):1847-1921.

39. Weintraub RJ. Commentary on the Conflict of Laws. 2nd ed. Mineola: The Foundation Press, Inc.; 1980.