Practice does not make perfect: Rethinking the doctrine of “the proper law of the contract” – A case for the Indian courts

IF 0.3 Q3 LAW
Saloni Khanderia
{"title":"Practice does not make perfect: Rethinking the doctrine of “the proper law of the contract” – A case for the Indian courts","authors":"Saloni Khanderia","doi":"10.1080/17441048.2020.1823068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An international contract calls for the identification of the law that would govern the transaction in the event of a dispute on the matter between the parties. Indian private international law adopts the doctrine of “the proper law of contract” to identify the legal system that will regulate an international contract. In the absence of any codification, the interpretation of the doctrine has been left to the courts. The judiciary adopts the common law tripartite hierarchy, viz., the “express choice”, “implied choice” and “the closest and most real connection” test to determine the proper law. However, the existing case law demonstrates the diverse interpretations given to each of these factors in India in the post-colonial era. The paper examines the manner in which the blind adoption of the decisions of the English courts has considerably hindered the development of Indian private international law. In this regard, the author suggests some plausible solutions to render India more amenable to international trade and commerce – such as the adoption of mechanisms similar to those formulated by its continental counterpart.","PeriodicalId":44028,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Private International Law","volume":"16 1","pages":"423 - 450"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17441048.2020.1823068","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Private International Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17441048.2020.1823068","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

An international contract calls for the identification of the law that would govern the transaction in the event of a dispute on the matter between the parties. Indian private international law adopts the doctrine of “the proper law of contract” to identify the legal system that will regulate an international contract. In the absence of any codification, the interpretation of the doctrine has been left to the courts. The judiciary adopts the common law tripartite hierarchy, viz., the “express choice”, “implied choice” and “the closest and most real connection” test to determine the proper law. However, the existing case law demonstrates the diverse interpretations given to each of these factors in India in the post-colonial era. The paper examines the manner in which the blind adoption of the decisions of the English courts has considerably hindered the development of Indian private international law. In this regard, the author suggests some plausible solutions to render India more amenable to international trade and commerce – such as the adoption of mechanisms similar to those formulated by its continental counterpart.
实践并不完美:重新思考“合同适用法”原则——以印度法院为例
一项国际合同要求确定在当事方之间就某一事项发生争议时管辖交易的法律。印度国际私法采用“适当合同法”原则来确定规范国际合同的法律体系。在没有任何编纂的情况下,该学说的解释权留给了法院。司法机关采用普通法的三重等级,即“明示选择”、“隐含选择”和“最接近和最真实的联系”测试来确定适当的法律。然而,现有的判例法表明,在后殖民时代,印度对这些因素的解释各不相同。本文探讨了盲目采纳英国法院的裁决在很大程度上阻碍了印度国际私法的发展的方式。在这方面,作者提出了一些合理的解决方案,使印度更容易接受国际贸易和商业,例如采用与大陆同行制定的机制类似的机制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
25.00%
发文量
14
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信