Author Description

Elaborating On Arguments From Kant's Legal Philosophy, The Chapter Argues That The Concept Of Private Rights Leads To The Idea Of Necessary Unity In Choice Of Law. Unity Is Achieved If Legislators And Courts Of All States Subject The Articulation Of Conflict-of-law Rules To The Same Idea Of Justice. The Relevant Idea Of Justice Is Neither The Idea Of Comparatively More Impairment Of Governmental Interests Nor An Idea Of Conflicts Justice. Rather, Justice In Choice Of Law Is About Reasonably Assigning Jurisdiction To Prescribe Private-law Rules. It Is Argued, That The Principle For The Assignment Is The Principle Of Territoriality: Private-law Claims Are Subject To That State's Jurisdiction In Whose Territory The Object Of The Infringed Right (thing Or Another's Deed) Is Located. Contrary To Widespread Belief, It Is This Principle Which Actually Governs The European Union's Choice-of-law Rules. However, In Contrast To The Current Law In The Eu (and Elsewhere), The Idea Of Choice Of Law As Assigning Jurisdiction Blocks The Idea That Private Parties Could Have The Power To Choose The Applicable Law At Will. This Understanding Of The Basic Rules In Choice Of Law Leaves Room For Politics, In A Wide Sense That Includes The Public Interests Of A Particular State On The One Hand And Imperatives From Good Morals On The Other