Private International Law Mid Sem Notes

Module 1 & Module 2

MODULE 1

PPT 1

1. Difference between Public International Law and Private International Law

• Public International Law:

• Subjects: Concerns disputes between two or more sovereign states.
• Structure: A horizontal structure where there's a single international
legal system, with common treaties/conventions applying uniformly to
all countries.
• Aim: Focuses on the maintenance of international peace, establishing
mutual relations, maintaining comity, and settling conflicts or disputes
amicably.
• Source: Defined by Article 38(1) of the International Court of Justice
(ICJ) which includes treaties, customary international law, general
principles of law recognized by civilized nations, and judicial decisions
and writings.
• Private International Law:
• Subjects: Concerns private parties like individuals, corporations, or
states in their commercial capacities. These disputes can arise even
between nationals of the same state.
• Structure: A horizontal structure where the domestic law (including
rules of private international law) of a country becomes applicable.
International treaties and conventions are still evolving and tend to
operate on a regional level. It's a branch of the domestic law of each
legal system.
• Aim: Focuses on settling conflicts, maintaining comity, determining
rights of parties, ensuring justice, convenience, and necessity.
• Sources: Domestic laws, judgements, multilateral and bilateral treaties.

Commonalities: Both recognize sovereign immunity and the principles of fairness,

justice, and conscience. There's also a development of international treaties and
conventions in the field of private international law.

2. Sources of Private International Law

• National Laws: These are the legal provisions set by a country.

 • Statutes/Legislations: Examples include the Civil Procedure Code, Indian
Succession Act, Indian Citizenship Act, Foreign Marriage Act, and the Indian
Evidence Act.
• Case Laws/Judgments, Multilateral, and Bilateral Treaties: Examples being
the Geneva Convention, New York Convention on Arbitration, UN Convention
for International Trade Law, etc.
3. Theories of Private International Law

• Statute Theory: Propounded by Bartolus, it focused on classifying laws based

on their objective. There were statutes concerning people, things, and mixed
statutes. The challenge was determining which statute fit under which
category.
• Theory of Acquired Rights: Introduced by Dutch Jurist Huber and elaborated
by others like Dicey and Beale. It emphasized territoriality and posited that
judges should protect rights already created under foreign laws.
• International Theory by Savigny: Savigny rejected other prevailing theories
and proposed that each legal relationship has a "seat," such as a person's
domicile, which determines the applicable laws.
• Local Law Theory by Walter Wheeler Cook: A theory that focuses on local
rights created by the forum's own laws. It suggests that foreign laws are
considered for reasons of convenience and expedience.
• Joseph Story and the Doctrine of Comity: Story emphasized mutual interest
and the necessity for justice to be reciprocated. However, his idea faced
criticisms, especially regarding the perceived application of foreign laws.
• Theory of Justice: This theory revolves around the ethical imperative of
fairness and justice, especially in international private transactions.
4. Denomination: Private International Law or Conflict of Laws

• Private International Law: This term was first used by Jurist Story. However, it
faced criticism as it could be confused with public international law.
Nonetheless, some like Westlake supported it as the most appropriate term.
• Conflict of Laws: Some believe this term is preferable as it emphasizes the
choice of law. But, it also faced criticisms, mainly that it doesn't encompass
jurisdiction rules and misleadingly suggests an inherent conflict between laws.
5. Unification of Private International Law

• Unification of Internal Laws: Organizations like UNIDROIT aim to harmonize

international private law across countries. Examples include conventions on
international sales of goods, formation of contracts, travel conflicts, etc.
• Unification of the Rules of Private International Law: Organizations such as
the Hague Conference on Private International Law (HccH) work towards a
broader unification of rules in private international law, addressing various
areas like child abduction, adoption, and more.
In summary, Private International Law stands as an essential branch of law that
addresses the challenges faced when legal issues span multiple jurisdictions. Its
theories, denominations, and sources play a crucial role in determining the applicable
laws and jurisdictions in international disputes, emphasizing the importance of
justice, fairness, and comity. The move towards unification is an ongoing process
aiming at global harmonization in this legal field.

PPT 2

Characterization: It's the process to identify the legal nature of a particular issue or case in the
realm of international private law. Its objective is to determine which law (or country's legal
system) should govern a particular case.

1. Primary Characterization:
• Identifies the legal nature of the cause of action.
• Determines the connecting factor.
2. Theories of Characterization:
• Two main theories: a. By The Lex Fori (Law of the Forum): - Advocated by
writers like Khan and Bartin. - The case should be characterized by the law of the
court where the case is brought (forum). - The internal law of the forum, or the
most closely related internal law, should be used for this characterization. -
Advantage: Upholds the sovereignty of the forum's legal system. - Disadvantage:
Can lead to absurd results when there's no close analogy between foreign and
forum laws.
b. By The Lex Causae (Law Governing the Question): - Supported by writers
like Wolff and Despagnet. - A case should be characterized by the foreign law
which governs the question. - Belief that every legal rule is characterized by the
system to which it belongs. - Disadvantage: It presents a circular argument.
3. Dépeçage and Incidental Question: The process whereby different issues within a single
case are governed by different laws.
4. Doctrine of Renvoi: Refers to the situation where a country's legal system refers a matter
to a foreign law, which in turn refers the matter back to the law of the first country.
5. Time Factor: It may be necessary to consider the laws as they stood at different times,
depending on the issue.
6. Procedure v. Substantive Law: Differentiating between procedural (how matters are to
be addressed) and substantive (actual rights and duties) law.
7. Exclusion of Foreign Law: Circumstances where foreign law may be excluded due to
public policy or other reasons.
8. Methods of Classification (optional): Different ways to classify or categorize issues for
the purpose of determining the applicable law.
9. Domicile and Nationality: Important factors that may determine which law applies in a
given situation.
Three Stages in Conflict of Laws:

1. Choice of Jurisdiction: Deciding which court or legal system has the authority to hear a
case.
 2. Choice of Law: Determining which country's laws should be applied to the case.
• Characterization is a crucial and complex part of this process, involving: a.
Identification of relevant issues. b. Selection of a rule of conflict of laws. c.
Identification of the legal system connected to the issue.
3. Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Decrees and Judgment: Recognizing and
enforcing judgments made in other jurisdictions.
Case Examples:

1. A Woman's Train Journey:

• Highlights the dilemma of whether a case is governed by contract law or tort law
based on the location of the contract signing or the location of the incident.
2. Indian-French Contract:
• Emphasizes the importance of how a court characterizes a case (contract/tort)
which can influence the outcome.
3. Englishman's Marriage Contract with a French Lady:
• Shows that the characterization of a case can lead to different legal outcomes.
4. Ogden v. Ogden, 1907:
• English court applied its own laws regarding marriage formalities, disregarding
the French court's decree of nullity, leading to an outcome where the second
marriage was deemed invalid.
5. Re Maldonado’s Estate, 1954:
• The English court relied on expert evidence to determine the correct classification
of provisions in the Spanish code, emphasizing the importance of the lex domicilii
in such determinations.
This unit sheds light on the complex world of private international law, specifically the process of
characterization. Different theories guide this process, each with its own advantages and
challenges. The provided case examples illustrate the intricacies and dilemmas faced by courts
when dealing with cross-border legal issues.

Theory of Two-Fold Characterization

• Primary Characterization – Lex fori:

• It deals with allocating the factual situation to its accurate legal
category.
• Classification is made based on lex fori as the lex causae remains
unknown until primary classification is done.
• Lex Fori doesn’t mean only domestic rules but also the rules of private
international law.
• Exceptions:
1. Classification of things or interests as movable or immovable is
determined by the lex situs.
2. If two foreign laws have the same characterization, the forum
should adopt their mutual characterization.
• Secondary Characterization – Lex Causae:
• It focuses on the delimitation and application of the appropriate law.
 • If the private international law of England establishes that a foreign
legal system is suitable, its domestic rules should be applied.
• Criticism:
• It's deemed artificial, unreal, and too mechanical.
• No clear distinction exists between primary and secondary.

Characterization By Comparative and Analytical Jurisprudence

• Rabel and Backett argue that characterization should be directed by analytical

jurisprudence and comparative law.
• The judge should determine and compare laws of the concerned
countries to select the fairest one.
• This technique should be more international and less insular than
domestic cases.
• Criticism:
• Few principles of analytical jurisprudence and comparative law have
universal application.
• Comparative law can identify differences but isn't always capable of
resolving them.
• It can increase litigation expenses as more evidence of foreign law is
required.

Internationalist’ Application of the lex fori/Enlightened Lex Fori

• The approach suggests that the lex fori should develop its concepts for use in
conflict cases, considering classifications within other foreign systems.
• Judges shouldn't be limited by specific notions of the domestic law of the lex
fori.
• Classification should be taken with a liberal and systematic spirit.

Nichols v Currlier, 1900:

• The case involved property rights under the doctrine of community of

property for a French couple who later moved to England.
• The English Private International Law's classification had to determine if the
widow's action was testamentary (governed by English law) or contractual
(governed by French Law).
• The House of Lords concluded it was an implied contract at marriage,
unaffected by the change of domicile.

Three Stages of Classification:

1. Classification of Cause of Action:

 • The judge allocates relevant legal questions based on facts to
appropriate categories.
2. Classification of Connecting Factor:
• The focus is on how the connecting factor should be defined, either by
lex fori or another law.
3. Classification of the Rule of Law:
• The judge selects the proper rule within the lex cause, considering
domestic and foreign laws.

Incidental Question:

• These are subsidiary questions arising while considering a main question with
foreign elements.
• They need to be resolved before determining the central legal question.
• The occurrence of an incidental question depends on the court's classification
of the arising question.

Conditions for Incidental Question:

1. The main question is governed by the law of a foreign country.

2. A preliminary question arises with a foreign element.
3. Different outcomes result from the English and foreign conflict rules.

Change in approach:

• How a judge arranges questions can determine if what was seen as incidental
becomes the main question.

DEPECAGE:

• This involves dissecting an issue into sub-issues and applying different states'
laws to each.
• Depecage sees existing conflicts and determines the relevant rules of the state
with the most significant concern in the issue's determination.
• It can become complex, leading to possible distortions or misuse in court
proceedings. It can also favor parties with better legal resources.

Babcock v. Jackson, 1963:

• This case showcases depecage by dealing with tort liability and safety device
laws from two different states. The court had to consider which state had the
most significant concern for each issue to apply the appropriate rules.
 PPT 3

1. Doctrine of Depecage:

• Originates from the French word ‘depecage’ meaning ‘cutting up,

dismembering’.
• It involves resolving different substantive issues in a tort case under the laws
of different states where choices differ.
• It's a choice of law on an issue-by-issue basis, akin to dissecting a case into
separate issues, each subject to individual law analysis.

2. Historical Context:

• Originally, courts applied the doctrine of lex loci delicti where law was
determined solely based on where the tort was committed.
• By the 20th century, courts started questioning the rigidity of lex loci delicti,
aiming for outcomes that made ‘good socio-economic sense’.
• Parties began using escape devices like characterizing tort claims as contract
claims to sidestep this strict rule.

3. Landmark Case: Babcock v. Jackson, 1963

• Incident: A passenger from New York got injured in Ontario, Canada. The
driver, also from New York, was absolved of liability by a Canadian statute.
• The New York court ruled in favor of applying New York law regardless of the
accident's location.
• This case denounced the vested rights and lex loci delicti doctrine.
• The court adopted the ‘center of gravity’ or ‘grouping of contracts’ approach
for choice of law.
• Introduced the ‘New Significant Relationship Test’.

4. Factors for Choice of Law:

• Place of injury
• Place of conduct causing injury
• Domicile, residence, nationality, and business place of parties
• Center of relationship between parties
• These factors are evaluated for their relative importance.

5. Depecage's Value:

• Facilitates justice by differentiating between true and false conflicts.

• Helps in limiting the number of true conflicts between differing laws.
 • Has been criticized as an escape route from the rigidity of conflict of law
determinations.

6. Methods [American Revolution]:

• Jurisdiction selection vs. Rule selection

• Jurisdiction selecting rules require applying the law of the country
chosen by choice-of-law rules.
• Rule-selecting focuses on choosing between different substantive rules
of law.
• True and False Conflict
• True Conflict: More than one set of rules has a legitimate claim to
application.
• False Conflict: Only one rule set has a claim to be applied.

7. Depecage's Controversies:

• Critics argue it offers too much court discretion, potentially threatening

neutrality and equality.

8. Detroit Case, 1989:

• Background: A plane crash resulted in the death of 156 individuals, leading to

wrongful death claims.
• The court had to determine the most appropriate state's law to apply among
various states with connections to the parties and the incident.
• It showcased the complexities and nuances in deciding the applicable law.

9. Objectives of Choice of Law Process:

• Achieve justice between parties.

• Give effect to parties' intentions and expectations.
• Protect or promote public interest.

10. Government Interest Analysis:

• This method determines the applicability of a legal rule based on its

underlying policy.
• Involves a four-step process:
1. Policy analysis
2. False conflict analysis
3. Conflict avoidance
4. Forum law application.
11. Reich v. Purcell, 1967:

• A lawsuit involving damage limits in a wrongful death case.

• The case demonstrated how governmental interest analysis can reveal false
conflicts and guide law application.

12. Brainerd Currie’s Viewpoint:

• If there's a conflict and it can't be resolved by interpreting the laws, then the
forum's laws should be applied.
• Comparative impairment approach suggests subordinating one state's policies
to another if the former's would be more impaired.

13. Challenges of Government Interest Analysis:

• Determining the exact policy underpinning a law can be ambiguous.

• Achieving uniformity in decisions across different jurisdictions is tough due to
varied justice perceptions.

1. Bernhard v. Harrah’s club (1976)

• Background:
• Two Californians became intoxicated at Harrah’s Club, a Nevada
corporation.
• After leaving, they collided with a motorcycle in California, injuring
Bernhard.
• Court Ruling:
• Despite Nevada not having a liability rule for tavern keepers serving
intoxicated patrons, the Supreme Court of California held Harrah’s Club
liable.
• California’s interest in safeguarding its residents took precedence over
Nevada’s interest in safeguarding its tavern keepers.
• The Court emphasized that since Nevada already penalizes tavern
keepers for serving intoxicated persons, applying California's civil
liability rule wouldn't burden tavern keepers further.
• California's law application was deemed vital for its residents'
protection.

2. Principles of Preference - Cavers

• Comparison with Currie:

 • Both Cavers and Currie supported rule-selection and identified
true/false conflicts.
• Divergence arose in handling true conflicts. Cavers didn’t fully reject all
choice of law rules like Currie did.
• Principles by Cavers:
• For true conflicts, the law that benefits the plaintiff should apply unless:
1. The law is outdated.
2. The state with the particular law lacks significant ties with the
defendant or intended actions.
• Cavers noted that his principles possess a territorial base to
counterbalance the personal bias of interest analysis.

3. Neumeier v. kuehner (1972)

• Background:
• An Ontario resident was killed in a car crash in Ontario with a New York
driver.
• Court’s Deliberation:
• The Ontario statute might have aimed to protect car owners from
ungrateful guests rather than preventing fraudulent claims.
• The Court discussed the complexities of determining underlying
policies of local law rules and the challenges in choosing between
conflicting policies.
• The necessity to develop more specific choice-of-law rules was
emphasized to ensure predictability and uniformity.
• Proposed Principles for Guest Statutes:
• The law of the state of injury or the parties’ home state should be
applied based on specific criteria related to standards of conduct,
financial protection, and established controls over conduct.
• Outcome:
• The court concluded that the rule of lex loci delict should not be
displaced as it was more connected to the case.

4. Interpretation of Forum Policy

• Principle:
• Reference to foreign law should be exceptional to prevent unfairness.
• Criticisms:
• This approach could encourage forum shopping, where claimants select
the most favorable jurisdiction.

5. Leflar – ‘Choice-influencing considerations’

 • Factors:
1. Predictability of results.
2. Maintenance of interstate and international order.
3. Simplification of the judicial task.
4. Advancement of the forum’s governmental interests.
5. Application of a superior rule of law.

6. Milkovich v. Saari, 1973

• Background:
• An Ontario resident was injured in Minnesota in a car driven by another
Ontario resident.
• Court Ruling:
• The rule of the injury's location is outdated; a rule focusing on justice
should be adopted.
• Factors considered included predictability, international relations, and
fairness.
• The judge preferred Minnesota’s approach to the guest statute.
• Dissenting Opinion:
• The Canadian parties likely preferred their local law.
• The decision might inadvertently favor the forum’s law over others.

7. Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws

• Basic Approach:
• If no directive is available, several factors like the need of the inter-state
and international systems, the policies of the forum, protection of
expectations, and ease in the application of the law are considered.
• General Principles:
• The law of the state with the most significant relationship to the
incident and parties should apply.
• Important contacts include the injury's location, the conduct causing
the injury, and the domicile or nationality of the parties.

The provided notes have delved into specific cases, principles, and perspectives
regarding the choice of law in conflicts. Each section provides insights into the
complexities and considerations inherent in determining the most appropriate
jurisdiction or law to apply in given situations.
 PPT 3.5

1. Introduction to Foreign Law in Indian Courts

• Based on the rules of choice of law, an Indian court typically applies the
relevant foreign law to deliver justice.
• Despite potential conflicts with domestic policies, Indian courts may still favor
foreign laws to ensure fair outcomes.
• For example, in insolvency proceedings, Indian courts honor the insolvency
status given by a foreign court except for immovable property.

2. English Courts’ Approach

• English courts have been open-minded towards foreign laws.

• They enforce contracts that are valid by their governing foreign laws
even if:
• The contract lacks consideration.
• Appears champertous (an illegal agreement where one person
agrees to finance another’s lawsuit).
• Excludes the jurisdiction of a foreign court.
• Is for a loan irrecoverable under English domestic law.
• They recognize various foreign marital practices:
• Polygamy.
• Proxy marriage.
• Marriages that would otherwise be prohibited under English
Law.
• Marriages below the age of consent.

3. Public Policy & Indian Contract Act, 1872

• Section 23 restricts courts from recognizing or enforcing contracts that

conflict with Indian public policy or if they were secured fraudulently.
• The common law in India supports the notion that a foreign judgment which
clashes with justice, morality, or appears unconscionable, or is obtained by
deceit will not be recognized.
• Certain transactions are deemed void under the Indian Contract Act, including:
• Contracts that prevent marriage, trade, or legal proceedings.
• Agreements with uncertain meanings.
• Wagering contracts.
• Contracts subject to two jurisdictions can be chosen by the parties and won’t
be against public policy.
• Choice of forum for the contract can change if it's backed by convenience or
promotes international trade and commerce.
4. Foreign Penal Law

• Courts don't enforce foreign penal laws.

• Penal laws impose punishments for duties breached to the state.
• Remedial laws compensate individuals for damages.
• The classification of a law as 'penal' is the prerogative of the local court.
• If foreign law is both penal and remedial, only the remedial part will be
enforced.
• Foreign laws related to crimes or those discriminatory based on race or
religion and threatening human rights might not be enforced but can be
recognized for other reasons.

5. Foreign Revenue Law

• Foreign revenue laws are akin to foreign penal laws in terms of enforceability.
• These laws display a state’s sovereignty and don't bind subjects of other
states.
• States may acknowledge but not necessarily enforce the revenue laws of other
states.
• Courts abstain from direct or indirect enforcement of foreign revenue laws.
• E.g., a court won’t collect foreign capital gains tax.
• They can, however, help foreign courts gather evidence for such proceedings.
• Actions to collect foreign taxes won't be entertained, irrespective of the
context.

6. Foreign Public Law

• Generally, courts don't enforce the public law of a foreign country.

• The boundaries of this principle are still unclear.

PPT 4

1. Introduction to Renvoi:

• Definition: Renvoi is a legal doctrine that gets triggered when courts

encounter a conflict of law and contemplate the law of another state,
specifically private international law rules.
• Origin: The term “Renvoi” is derived from the French language, which means
“send back” or “return unopened”.
• Application: This doctrine is relevant when deliberating on foreign issues,
especially in cases involving marriage or succession disputes.
 • Purpose: It aims to ensure consistency in outcomes, thus discouraging forum
shopping, by adopting the same law irrespective of where the case is being
adjudicated.

2. Illustration – The Classic Case of Forgo:

• Background: Forgo, a Bavarian national, mostly resided in France. Upon his

demise, he left behind significant movable assets in France.
• French Court's Decision: Initially, the French court decided to base the
succession on Bavarian law due to Forgo's nationality.
• Bavarian Law's Take: While Bavarian law did provide inheritance rights for
maternal collateral relatives, its conflict of law rules pointed back to the
deceased's domicile law.
• Outcome: Ultimately, accepting the renvoi, the French court applied its law,
resulting in the state acquiring all of Forgo's property, sidelining his relatives.

3. Scenarios of Renvoi's Application:

• Scenario I: When the law of the forum (lex fori) and the applicable law (lex
causae) use the same connecting factor but interpret it differently.
• Scenario II: When the lex fori and the lex causae employ different connecting
factors concerning the same legal category. For example, English law might
consider domicile while Italian law might look at nationality.
• The Main Issue: The ambiguity arises when determining what is truly meant
by ‘the law of X’ especially since every country possesses its conflict of laws
rules. This raises the question - does the law of a particular country refer solely
to its domestic laws, its conflict rules, or does it also consider its rules applying
renvoi?

4. The Renvoi Process:

• Internal Law Approach: Often termed as 'no renvoi'. It solely refers to the
internal laws, ignoring conflict rules.
• Single or Partial Renvoi: Here, the court of one jurisdiction (e.g., England)
might refer to the law of another (e.g., Italy). The original court then considers
how the foreign court (Italian) would have perceived and processed the
reference.
Illustrative Cases:
• In Re Annesley (1925): The central issue revolved around Mrs.
Annesley's domicile - whether she genuinely acquired a French
domicile or retained her English one, which had implications on her
property's succession.
 • In Re Ross (1930): The English court had to determine the inheritance of
an English woman’s assets, who, although had an English origin, was
domiciled in Italy at the time of her death.
• In Re Neilson: Focused on a tort claim involving a limitation period. The
case's core was whether the claim would be governed by the PRC
(where the accident happened) or Western Australia (where the plaintiff
was ordinarily resident).

5. Challenges of Renvoi:

• It requires the judge to familiarize himself with the foreign country's view on
the single renvoi.
• The foreign court's doctrine can present complexities, such as procedural
matters in England needing to follow English law even if a foreign counterpart
might see them as substantive.
• Public policy can sometimes preclude the application of a foreign law.

6. Renvoi in Commercial Contracts:

• Renvoi is usually discarded in contractual obligations, with the rationale being

the predictability and clarity needed in business dealings.
Illustrative Cases:
• NTPC v Singer Co (1992): This case stressed the principle that parties
are free to select the governing law in international commercial
arbitrations.
• Jose Paulo Coutinho v Maria Luiza Valentina Pereira (2019): The debate
was whether the Portuguese Civil Code or the Indian Succession Act
1925 should oversee the succession of a Goan’s property located
outside Goa.

7. Recommendation:

• One should review the case, Venkateswarane Sivadjy v. Alice Viala – 2022 SCC
Online Mad 7833/AIR 2022 Mad 94, for insights on Indian courts referring to
French Law regarding property matters between spouses.

PPT 5

1. Substance and Procedure in Private International Law:

• The distinction between substance and procedure is delineated based on the

purposes it serves. For instance, when determining the outcomes of specific
actions or events, it's considered rational to use the 'foreign substantive law' if
 there's a factual association with the foreign nation, without causing undue
inconvenience.
• Issues that affect the rights or obligations of parties in a case and seem
substantially related on their face are classified as matters of substance.
• Procedural rules revolve around litigation processes, such as how courts
conduct their proceedings. The lex fori (law of the court where the case is
heard) defines the practice and procedure rules.

2. Illustrative Case - Re Cohn [1945]:

• This case concerned conflicts of law relating to estate administration when

someone dies without a will.
• A German mother and daughter, both residing in Germany, died in a London
air raid. It remained uncertain who survived whom.
• According to the Law of Property Act 1925's Section 184, it's presumed the
older individual dies first. Thus, the daughter was presumed the surviving
beneficiary of her mother's movable assets.
• However, the court decided that survivorship depended on their domicile's
law. Consequently, the German Civil Code's provision was applied, which
assumed simultaneous deaths.
• The outcome was that the daughter couldn't inherit her mother's assets since
she wasn't alive when the succession began.

3. John Pfeiffer Pty Ltd v Rogerson:

• This case examined the differences between procedural and substantive

matters.
• Rogerson, employed by Pfeiffer, was injured in New South Wales (NSW) but
filed a damages claim in the Australian Capital Territory. A limitation on non-
economic loss damages was present in NSW law but absent in ACT law.
• Another relevant case in this context is Bank of Baroda v Kotak Mahindra Bank
Ltd, AIR2020SC1474.

4. Time Factor in Private International Law:

• Typically, questions arise concerning whether French or English jurisdictions or

laws are applicable. The reference pertains to a legal system's territorial area,
but time is also a factor.
• Key scenarios in private international law connected to time include:
1. Changes in the governing legal system's internal law, exemplified by
Starkowski v. Attorney General.
2. Alterations in the forum's conflictual rule due to legislative/judicial
decisions, as seen in Hornett v. Hornett.
 3. Pinpointing when a connecting factor in the forum's conflictual rule
should be localized. This is especially crucial when factors like domicile
or residence change.

5. Pleading and Proving of Foreign Law:

• Courts must discern what the foreign law entails and whether there are
reasons to exclude it in specific cases.
• Common law countries regard foreign law as a factual matter. Parties must
prove it using evidence, be it oral, documented, or via expert witnesses. The
onus to prove lies on the parties.
• The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, provides guidelines on proving foreign law:
• Sections 38, 45, 74, 78, 81, and 82 detail the admittance, relevance,
presumption, and proof of foreign documents and laws.
• Notably, failing to establish foreign law's content means the forum's law will
be the default.
• The 1961 Hague Convention modernized foreign document legalization by
introducing apostilles, yet the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, hasn't incorporated
these changes, maintaining the need for diplomatic agent certification.

6. Relevant Cases on Pleading and Proving of Foreign Law:

• Harishanker Jain v Sonia Gandhi, 2001:

• This case contested the election of Sonia Gandhi, alleging she wasn't an
Indian citizen at election time. The petitioner used Italian law to argue
her citizenship stance.
• The court viewed Italian law as foreign, thus treating it as a factual
matter. Foreign laws aren't automatically acknowledged by courts and
must be proven.
• Shin-Etsu Chemical Co. Ltd. v Aksh Optifibre Ltd:
• The court ruled that foreign law can't be validated through affidavits
and needs trial-based evidence. The case concerned an arbitration
clause governed by Japanese law, and the court favored expert
testimonies over legal treatises on foreign law. Upon proving foreign
law, its interpretation is left to the Indian courts.
• A more recent case, Sorin Group Italia v Neeraj Garg, 2023 SCC OnLine Del
3512, also offers insights on this topic.

Rhodia Ltd. v Neon Laboratories Ltd, AIR 2002 Bom 502

1. Background:
• Plaintiff: Indian company under Indian Companies Act 1956, Mumbai-
based.
 • Defendants: English public limited company and an Indian company,
Mumbai-based.
• Agreement: The plaintiff had exclusive rights for 3 years (from 1997) to
market and distribute Isoflurane and Halothane in India, Sri Lanka,
Bangladesh, and Nepal.
• Jurisdiction Clause: Agreement preferred English law and English
courts.
2. Court's Observation:
• While parties pled English jurisdiction, there was no evidence of English
legal position regarding exclusive jurisdiction.
• Without evidence, the Indian court's jurisdiction can't be negated.

Mode of Proof for Foreign Law:

1. Witness Qualification:
• The foreign law must be proven by a qualified witness. This witness
should possess the necessary expertise to give evidence about another
country's law.
• The court usually accepts the evidence if unopposed, unless it's
unreliable.
2. Importance of Evidence:
• As foreign law is factual, courts can't rely on prior Indian decisions
about foreign law.
• Proving foreign law via expert opinion is expensive and lengthy.
• The obligation to present expert evidence can affect parties dependent
on foreign law. This evidence might be biased and requires cross-
examination.

Exclusion of Foreign Laws:

1. Why Exclude Foreign Law?:

• Sometimes, the private international law of a nation, in cases involving
foreign elements, might apply foreign laws.
• But this application is excluded due to Public Policy, Foreign Penal Law,
Foreign Revenue Law, and Foreign Public Law.
• The English doctrine prefers the forum's rules over conflicting foreign
laws.
• Section 13 and 14 of the Indian CPC 1908 also dictate similar
requirements regarding foreign judgments.
2. Public Policy:
• Defined by Graveson, public policy encompasses matters Parliament or
courts view as crucial for the state and society.
• It's about law policy, covering both spirit and letter.
 • Anything causing injustice, obstructing justice, violating statutes, or
against good morals is against public policy.
• This doctrine is termed ordre public in civil law jurisdictions and 'public
policy' in common law nations.
• Public policy doesn't merely reject foreign law due to differences but
requires the foreign law to be alien to local justice fundamentals.
• References include Shri Lal Mahal Ltd. V. Progetto Grano and Y
Narasimha Rao v Y Venkata Lakhmi.
3. Public Policy & Foreign Arbitral Awards:
• Many cases defining public policy deal with enforcing foreign arbitral
awards in India.
• Notably, in Renusager Power Co Ltd v General Electric Co, the court
stated that foreign arbitral awards can be rejected only if against India's
interests, public policy, or morality.
• In ONGC v Western Geco, the court added elements to public policy
definitions, such as natural justice principles and rationality.
4. International Law and Public Policy:
• Kuwait Airways Corp v Iraqi Airways Co showed how public policy
relates to international law. This case dealt with the Iraqi invasion of
Kuwait, the subsequent nationalization of Kuwaiti assets, and the
enforcement of Iraqi law.
5. Mandatory Rules:
• These rules reflect core policies of a nation.
• Article 9(1) of the EU's Rome I Regulation provides the best
categorization.
6. Exclusion of Penal Laws:
• Penal laws are equivalent to criminal laws and impose punishments for
offenses against the state.
• In Huntington v. Attrill 1892, a test for determining whether an action is
penal was provided.
7. Exclusion of Other Foreign Public Laws:
• Beyond penal laws and tax-related laws, courts may also refuse to
enforce other foreign public laws.
• Cases like Islamic Republic of Iran v. The Barakat Galleries Ltd and the
UK Government's attempt to prevent Spycatcher's publication provide
insights.
8. Exclusion of Foreign Revenue Laws:
• Revenue laws impose non-contractual payments for the state.
• The traditional view has been that courts don't recognize other nations'
revenue laws.
• Government of India v. Taylor, also known as Re Delhi Electric Supply &
Traction Co Ltd, elaborated on this, discussing the non-enforceability of
foreign tax claims in English law.
 MODULE 2

PPT 6
1. Understanding Jurisdiction

• Origin: The term 'jurisdiction' is a combination of Latin words - ius (meaning

right) and dicere (meaning to say or pronounce). This translates to the power
or authority given to a court to deliver or pronounce justice in a specific case.
• Relevance in Private International Law: Jurisdiction is a pivotal concept in
Private International Law. The questions that arise are: Is the court competent?
Does it possess the power to hear and decide on the claim?
• Consequence of Jurisdiction: Once a court establishes its jurisdiction over a
matter, it will decide on the procedure to determine the applicable law for that
dispute. The ability of a court to adjudicate on a matter also dictates if its
judgment can be recognized or enforced in foreign territories.
2. Jurisdiction in India

• General Rule: In India, anyone, whether an individual or a legal entity, has the
right to either file a suit or be sued in court. This applies irrespective of their
residency status. However, the prerequisite is that the conditions to assume
jurisdiction are met.
• Special Cases:
• Minors: Lawsuits by or against minors should be instituted by the
minor's guardian, as specified in Order 32 of the Civil Procedure Code
(CPC).
• Companies: Lawsuits involving companies can be initiated by its
secretary, director, or principal officer. This must be done in the
company's name (Order 29 of CPC).
• Partnerships: A lawsuit involving a partnership must be initiated by
two or more partners conducting business in India, provided they were
partners when the cause of action arose (Order 30 Rule 1 of CPC).
3. Restrictions and Limitations on Jurisdiction in India

• Section 83 of the CPC: Alien enemies are prohibited from initiating lawsuits.
However, there are no restrictions on filing suits against them. An 'alien
enemy' refers to a national from a country that's at war with India and is
residing in India without governmental permission.
• Section 84: Foreign states cannot initiate a suit in an Indian civil court unless
it concerns the enforcement of private rights vested in certain representatives
like rulers or ambassadors.
• Sovereign Immunity: A doctrine that shields a sovereign state from being a
defendant in another country's court without its consent. This immunity is
supported in the CPC, UN Privileges Act, and the Diplomatic Relations Act.
 • Section 86 of the CPC: This section puts restrictions on initiating lawsuits
against foreign states without the central government's consent. Consent will
be given only if certain conditions, ranging from trading within local court
limits to the foreign state waiving off immunity, are met.
4. Acts that Confer Immunity

• UN Privileges Act: Offers immunity against legal proceedings to:

• The United Nations (UN) and its assets.
• Officials of the UN acting in their official capacity.
• Representatives of UN organs and conferences.
• Experts performing missions for the organization.
The immunity can be waived by the Secretary-General and shouldn't be used
for personal benefits.
• Diplomatic Relations Act: This act doesn't allow civil or administrative
proceedings against certain diplomatic individuals and their families for
official acts, unless immunity is expressly waived by the sending state. It
emphasizes that immunity from jurisdiction doesn't eliminate the factors
which lead to a lawsuit.
5. Types of Jurisdiction

• Jurisdiction in personam: This pertains to actions against a person to compel

certain actions, such as payment or not doing something specific (like an
injunction). The core idea is to settle rights between involved parties. This
excludes criminal or political rights. Matters involving family disputes are not
covered under CPC but by personal laws.
• Suits of a Commercial Nature: These are regulated by the Commercial
Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015.
• International Commercial Arbitration: Defined by the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 (ACA), it refers to arbitrations concerning commercial
disputes where at least one party is from outside India.
6. Jurisdiction Parameters

• For actions in personam in civil and commercial matters, a court can assume
jurisdiction based on Sections 16 to 20 of the CPC. After initially assuming
jurisdiction, the court will hear and decide the case based on the fulfilment of
certain prerequisites.
• Types of Jurisdiction: The jurisdiction of a court in civil and commercial cases
can be broadly classified into:
• Exclusive Jurisdiction: Only one court has the authority to adjudicate
the matter.
• Permissive Jurisdiction: More than one court can have the authority
to adjudicate the matter.
In conclusion, the choice of jurisdiction is paramount in legal proceedings. It defines
the competence and authority of a court to hear and determine cases. The laws and
acts mentioned provide a comprehensive framework for jurisdiction, its limitations,
and immunities in the Indian context.

Exclusive Jurisdiction

Exclusive jurisdiction refers to the sole authority a court holds over certain types of cases.

Sections 16 to 18 of the CPC detail the boundaries of this authority and restrict the addition of
any other factors, including the defendant's residence or place of business, to determine
jurisdiction.

Under Section 16, when the suit relates to immovable property, the jurisdiction solely lies with
the court where the property is located. This applies to cases involving:

1. Recovery of immovable property with or without rent.

2. Partition of immovable property.
3. Foreclosure, sale, or redemption in case of mortgage or charge on immovable property.
4. Determining any rights or interests in immovable property.
5. Compensation for damage to immovable property.
6. Recovery of movable property under restraint or attachment.

Section 17 stipulates that if a case is about relief or compensation due to harm to immovable
property spread across different court jurisdictions, the court where a part of the property is
situated can exercise exclusive jurisdiction, given that the entire claim originated in its territory.

Permissive Jurisdiction

Sections 19 and 20 define permissive jurisdiction. This means that, within certain bounds, a
plaintiff may choose a court based on specific criteria:

• Residence: Refers to a natural person. The defendant's residence is usually key to

determining a court's jurisdiction.

Under Section 19, a court can have jurisdiction over tort or delict matters if:

• The wrong was committed to movable property or a person and the defendant was
"actually or voluntarily" residing in its jurisdiction when the suit started.
• For cases with multiple defendants, jurisdiction is valid if all defendants were residing in
its area during the suit's commencement.

Residing "actually and voluntarily" means having a permanent home in the court's territory or
having lived there significantly. Even a brief stay can count as residence, as long as it isn't fleeting
or casual.

However, simply being within a court's limits doesn't give it jurisdiction. The residence must be
voluntary and not due to reasons like imprisonment or breaching immigration laws.
Section 20 suggests that for jurisdiction, the CPC doesn't differentiate between habitual and
ordinary residences.

Place of Business

Sections 19 and 20 also state that a court can assume jurisdiction if a defendant was running a
business or working for profit within the court's bounds when the case began. For companies,
which are seen as having no physical existence, a court can gain jurisdiction if the business is
operated within its territory.

"Carrying on business" means consistently engaging in substantial, organized activities with a

clear intent. Corporations are assumed to conduct business where they have their main office.

The term "personally work for gain" signifies working in exchange for money, as seen in
professions like teaching, medicine, or law.

Online transactions also come under this purview, as exemplified by the case World Wrestling
Entertainment v M/s Reshma Collection and Ors. A business operating online has a virtual
presence wherever it can contract with customers via its website.

Another case, Millennium & Copthorne International Limited v Aryans Plaza Services Private
Limited & Ors, stressed that the vast majority of hotel bookings are done online. The court sees
no difference between direct online interactions and using third-party services.

Cause of Action

A cause of action refers to a situation or set of facts that entitles one to seek legal redress.

Section 19 confers jurisdiction to a court in the area where the cause of action arose, especially if
it relates to harm done to movable assets.

Section 20 also allows a court to assume jurisdiction based on where the cause of action took
place, although the exact circumstances aren't outlined in the statute.

For example, the location of a contract's conclusion can depend on the mode of negotiation. If
negotiated telephonically, it's where the offer's acceptance was received. If through post, it's
where the acceptance was sent from.

In Mohannakumaran Nair v. Vijayakumaran Nair, the case revolved around the location of the
cause of action, which, in this case, was borrowing money. Although the borrowing occurred in
Saudi Arabia, the plaintiff filed a suit in India. The issue of territorial jurisdiction was raised since
the entire transaction occurred outside India.

In Conclusion

Jurisdiction is a complex issue, determined by factors ranging from the nature of the property
involved to the defendant's residence or business location. The aforementioned sections and
cases provide a comprehensive understanding of how jurisdiction is established and exercised in
India.

PPT 7

Choice of Jurisdiction in India and International Law

1. Service of Summons in India and Abroad: Under the Code of Civil

Procedure (CPC), there are provisions for serving a summons on individuals or
entities both within and outside India.
• Sections 27, 28, and 29, and Order 5 of CPC: These provisions guide
how summons should be served. The court can permit summons
service outside India if it possesses jurisdiction over the matter.
• Cases where service outside India may be necessary:
1. Immovable property situated within the court’s jurisdiction.
2. Infringement of a trademark or copyright, where the plaintiff
resides within the court’s jurisdiction.
3. Any cause of action that took place, either wholly or partly,
within the court’s territory.
• Methods of service abroad: The court can utilize various means to
serve the summons based on the specificities of the case.
• Historically, prior to the Hague Service Convention, service was
done using Letters of Request.
• Post 1st August 2007, after India signed the Hague Convention,
the process of service in India shifted to adhere to the
convention's methods, including certain conditions such as:
• Documents must be in English.
• No service via mail.
• Service in India must be indirect, through a proper
authority.
• Documents under the Hague Convention can't be served
directly to the defendants in India by private judicial
officers.
2. Conditions for Serving a Foreign Defendant: When applying to serve a
defendant outside the jurisdiction, the claimant must:
• Prove there’s a substantial issue to be discussed.
• Showcase a strong, arguable case.
• Demonstrate that England (in the example given) is the best forum for
the trial.
3. Determining the Appropriate Forum: The English court's aim is to identify
the "natural forum" - where the case has the most real connection. This is
determined by considering factors like:
 • Nature of the dispute.
• Legal and practical issues involved.
• Place where parties reside or do business.
• Law governing the transactions.
4. Stay of Jurisdiction:
• Forum Non Conveniens (FNC): A discretionary power that enables a
court to dismiss a case if another forum is more suitable.
• The defendant has the burden to prove:
1. There's a more appropriate forum available.
2. Choosing this forum wouldn’t cause injustice to the
plaintiff.
• Foreign Jurisdiction Clause:
• Exclusive jurisdiction clause: Court will respect the exclusive
jurisdiction agreed upon by parties, unless strong reasons are
shown otherwise.
• Non-exclusive jurisdiction clause: Allows for multiple
jurisdictions unless the parties specify otherwise.
5. Anti-Suit Injunction: It's an order to restrain a party from starting or
continuing a legal process in a foreign country.
• The main principles are:
• The order targets the party, not the foreign court.
• It must affect someone under the jurisdiction of the court
issuing the order.
• It shouldn't interfere with foreign court jurisdiction without a
good reason.
• The court will intervene if it sees a party's actions as unfair or
damaging.
6. Relevance of Previous Cases:
• ABC Laminart (P) Ltd v AP Agencies: The court can't be entirely
ousted from jurisdiction by agreement. Agreements to exclusively favor
one competent court are valid, but completely ousting the court's
jurisdiction is against public policy.
• Glaxosmithkline Consumer Healthcare Limited and Horlicks
Limited and Ors. v. Heinz India (P) Limited: Another significant case
in the context of jurisdiction.
7. Underlying Themes:
• Jurisdictional Respect: Courts should respect the jurisdictional
boundaries and only intervene when necessary for justice.
• Comity: Courts should avoid unnecessary interference in other courts'
affairs.
• Justice & Fairness: The ultimate aim is to achieve justice and ensure
the interest of all parties involved.
In essence, the notes highlight the processes, legalities, and considerations when
dealing with international jurisdiction and the service of summons both in India and
abroad. The goal is to achieve justice while respecting the jurisdictional boundaries
and the interests of all parties involved.
1. Modi Entertainment Network v W.S.G Cricket PTC – 2003

• The case centered around the examination of principles that guide the
provision of an anti-suit injunction. Specifically, a court in its natural
jurisdiction seeks to restrain a party from initiating or continuing a lawsuit
involving the same parties in a foreign court that the parties had previously
chosen.
2. Airbus Industries GIE v. Patel and Ors. (1998)

• Context:
• The incident involved British citizens of Indian origin who traveled on
an Airbus-320 that crashed at the Bangalore airport.
• These passengers began legal proceedings in Texas against Airbus
Industries.
• American claimants made similar claims in Texas.
• Airbus acquired a declaration from the Bangalore court stating the
defendants couldn't proceed against them in any global court other
than in Bangalore.
• Airbus then approached the English Court to enforce the Bangalore
judgement and to seek an injunction to halt the Texas proceedings.
• Outcome:
• The English Court deemed it against the doctrine of comity (mutual
respect between courts) to provide an anti-suit injunction restraining
foreign proceedings unless the English forum had a significant
connection or interest in the matter.
• Texas doesn’t recognize the principle of 'forum non conveniens' (the
discretion of a court to refuse to hear a case that might be more
appropriately tried elsewhere).
3. Anti-Suit Injunction

• Defined as a court order preventing an opposing party from starting or

continuing a proceeding in another jurisdiction, mainly to avert forum
shopping.
• Consequences of Disobeying: If violated, a contempt of court order might be
issued.
• Factors for Granting Anti-Suit Injunction:
• The applicant must demonstrate that proceedings in another forum are
either "vexatious" (without enough grounds and purely to cause
annoyance) or "oppressive" (unjust hardship).
 • The judiciary has set high standards for the provision of such
injunctions. The judge must consider:
1. Respect for other courts (Principle of Comity).
2. Justice for both the complainant and the defendant.
3. The opposing party must be subject to the jurisdiction of the
court.
4. Turner v Grovit (2005)

• Background:
• Mr. Turner, a British national, was employed as a legal advisor by the
Cheque Point group managed by Mr. Grovit.
• Mr. Turner worked in London but later requested a transfer to the
group's Madrid office.
• By March 1998, he filed a claim in London alleging breaches of his
employment contract and accusing the group of involvement in
unlawful conduct concerning wages and salaries of employees.
• In response, two companies from the group initiated legal proceedings
against him in Spain, accusing him of professional misconduct.
• Outcome:
• The Court of Appeal in London believed the sole purpose of the
Spanish proceedings was intimidation and thus granted an injunction
to stop the foreign proceedings. This decision was challenged in the
House of Lords.
• The European Court of Justice (ECJ) later determined that such
injunctions weren't consistent with the Brussels Convention.
5. Jurisdiction under Brussels Regulation

• Purpose: It aims to maintain the European Union as an area promoting

freedom, security, and justice.
• Key Provisions:
• General Rule: A defendant is generally sued in their domicile's courts.
• Article 27 - Lis Pendens: If similar proceedings between identical
parties are initiated in multiple member states' courts, all except the
first court must pause their proceedings.
• Article 28 - Related Matters: If related actions are ongoing in different
courts, any court other than the first can halt its proceedings.
6. HCCCA – Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements

• India has not ratified the HCCCA as of 1st October 2015.

• Purpose: It governs the operation of exclusive choice of court agreements in
civil and commercial matters among its contracting parties.
• Key Provisions:
 • Article 5: The chosen forum can't decline jurisdiction unless the
agreement is nullified by its law.
• Article 6: Courts not chosen must suspend or dismiss proceedings
related to the agreement, barring exceptional situations.
7. Jurisdiction in Actions in rem

• Definition: It's a court's authority to rule over the status of an individual or an

object.
• Admiralty Act 2017:
• The Act gives the High Court exclusive jurisdiction over maritime claims
based on a vessel's location.
• It enables the High Court to rule on disputes over ownership,
employment earnings of the vessel, mortgage or charge on the vessel,
damage caused by the vessel's operation, and agreements concerning
goods' transportation.

PPT 8

1. Introduction to Domicile, Nationality and Habitual Residence:

• Domicile: A legal connection between an individual and a legal system or jurisdiction.

• Nationality: Relates to a person's political status indicating allegiance to a particular
country.
• Habitual Residence: Concerns the place where a person usually lives or resides.

2. Jurisdiction:

• Meaning: Jurisdiction refers to the authority of a court or a body to deal with specific
matters and issues.
• Types: While the exact types aren't specified in the presentation, jurisdictions typically
include personal, territorial, and subject-matter jurisdictions.
• Exclusive and Permissive Jurisdiction: Exclusive jurisdiction means only one court has
the power to hear a case, while permissive jurisdiction means more than one court can
take the case.
• Implications in Private International Law: Jurisdiction can determine which court hears
a case involving parties from different countries or jurisdictions.
• Exclusion and Immunity: Some entities or individuals may be immune from the
jurisdiction of certain courts or may be excluded from being prosecuted under specific
jurisdictions.
• Action in personam vs. Action in rem: Action in personam is directed against a specific
person. Action in rem is directed against a thing (usually a piece of property).
• Jurisdictional Immunities: Situations where a state or entity is exempt from the
jurisdiction of foreign national courts.

3. Domicile:
 • Definition: It links a person with a specific legal system. Essentially, it's where a person
intends to reside permanently or indefinitely.
• Types:
• Domicile of Origin: Acquired at birth. Based on parents' domicile during the
time of birth.
• Domicile of Choice: Acquired by residing in a country with the intent of staying
there indefinitely. The intention can come before or after establishing residence.
• Domicile of Dependency: For minors, married women, and mentally disordered
individuals. Usually dependent on someone else's domicile.
• Relevance: Domicile decides which country's law applies to an individual in personal
matters. Used mainly in countries like Ireland, England, the US, the British
Commonwealth, Denmark, Norway, and Brazil. Other countries may focus more on
nationality or habitual residence.

4. Nationality:

• Definition: A person's allegiance to a particular country, often based on birthplace or

descent.
• Relevance: It's a primary legal connector in many European countries, Japan, and some
South American states.
• Comparison with Domicile: Nationality can be more straightforward to determine than
domicile. However, applying nationality may sometimes result in artificial and
inappropriate legal outcomes.

5. Citizenship:

• Definition: Refers to a national who enjoys full political and civil rights in a state.
Associated with a person's political status.

6. Habitual Residence:

• Definition: The place where an individual usually lives.

• Relevance: Used as a connecting factor in legislation. Plays a role in matters like
matrimonial jurisdiction and succession.
• Issues: Determining habitual residence can be tricky if a person is frequently moving. The
length and intention behind a residence also come into play.

7. Case Highlight – Winans v. Attorney General (1904):

• Mr. Winans, born in the USA, had significant residence periods in Russia and later
England.
• The core issue was determining his domicile at the time of his death, affecting legacy
duty on property abroad.
• Despite residing in England for 37 years, Lord MacNaughten concluded that Winans
retained his original domicile in New Jersey, USA, based on his intentions and ongoing
projects related to the USA.

8. Notable Cases:
 • Shankaran Govindan v Lakshmi, AIR1974SC1764
• Sondur Gopal and Ors v. Sondur Rajini and Ors. AIR2013SC2678
• Sidhu George v The passport office and Ors, ILR2015(2)Kerala629

9. Further Reading:

• Louis De Raedt v Union of India

10. Conclusion: Determining domicile, nationality, and habitual residence is crucial for various
legal considerations, especially in private international law. Jurisdiction plays a key role in
deciding which court and which nation's laws will be applied in specific cases involving parties
from different countries or jurisdictions.