MCQs

1. Under private international law an act is governed by the law of the place where it is done is
termed as what?
A. Lex regit actum

2. ______ of parties to marriage has been considered as a matter of essential validity of marriage.
A. Consent

3. In India intercaste, inter-communal, inter-religious marriages can be performed only under _____
A. Special marriage act

4. If condition of present nationality of voluntary submission to the foreign jurisdiction is fulfilled then
foreign court will be recognised as passing judgement in ______
A. Action in personam

5. What determines the title of something in a conclusive manner effective against all persons then or
there after interested in it???
A. Action in rem

6. Who said that the court only recognizes a foreign judgement only after that judgement has been
rendered in accordance with its rules of conflict of laws
A. Pillet

7. Who propounded the doctrine of harmony between judgement and law?

A. Von Bar

8. ______ is the oldest theory on the recognition of foreign judgement.

A. Theory of comity

9. Which sec of cpc is regarding stay of suit?

A. Sec 10

10. Which doctrine applies when the same plaintiff applies two action one in English court and other
in another court
A. Lis alibi pendens

11. What is the book in which Cheshire cited the cases of Renvoi
A. Private international law

12. What is the doctrine of single renvoi also called

A. Renvoi proper

13. Who fathered the origin of the dual theory of lex fori and lex causae
A. Prof Cheshire and Dr Robertson

14. Who promoted the theory of justice

A. Gravesar

15. Which conference of 1951 formulated convention on the international contracts for the sale of
goods.
A. Hague

16. Which conference of 1930 produced the uniform law of bills of exchanges and cheques
A. Geneva
17. Who defined private international law as the rules voluntarily chosen by a given state for the
decision of cases which have a foreign complexion
A. Barty

18. Which jurist was the first to assert that the reference to a foreign law necessary because of
comity?
A. Johannes Voet

19. When did the Warsaw convention take place?

A. 1929

20. ______ is one of the branches of conflict of laws which assert whether whether the forum court
has the power to resolve the dispute at hand.
A. Jurisdiction

21. In the 17th century the stature theory was further developed by _____
A. Dutch Jurist

22. Who propounded the comparative theory of law?

A. Rabel and Beckett

23. What is the foreign court theory also called

A. Doctrine of total renvoi

24. The burden of proving the foreign law lies exclusively on the
A. Parties

Descriptive

1) What is injunction?
A. An injunction is a prohibitive writ issued by a court of equity, at the suit of a party complainant,
directed to a party defendant in the action, or to a party made a defendant for that purpose,
forbidding the latter to do some act, or to permit his servants or agents to do some act, which he is
threatening or attempting to commit, or restraining him in the continuance thereof, such act being
unjust and inequitable, injurious to the plaintiff, and not such as can be adequately redressed by an
action fit law. Types of Injunctions in the Indian Law
Generally speaking, there are two types of injunctions under the act[2], as mentioned below:

i. Temporary Injunction
ii. Perpetual/Permanent Injunction

i. Temporary Injunction
Temporary injunctions, as the name suggests, are the injunctions that are given for a specific period of
time or until the court gives further order regarding the matter in concern. They can be obtained
during any stage of the trial and are regulated by the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908:

Section 94: The section provides for supplemental proceedings, to enable the court to prevent the
ends of justice from being defeated. Section 94(c) states that a court may grant temporary injunction
and in case of disobedience commit the person guilty thereof to the civil prison and order that his
property be attached and sold. Section 94(e) of the Code enables the court to make interlocutory
orders as may appear to it to be just and convenient.

Section 95: If it is found by the court that there were no sufficient grounds to grant the injunction, or
the plaintiff is defeated in the suit, the court may award reasonable compensation to the defendant
on his application claiming such compensation.

Permanent Injunction
A permanent injunction can be granted by the court by passing a decree made at the hearing and
upon the merits of the suit. Once such decree is passed, the defendant is permanently prohibited
from the assertion of a right, or from the commission of an act, which would be contrary to the rights
of the plaintiff. A permanent injunction may be granted:

a. To the plaintiff in a suit to prevent a breach of an obligation existing in his favour, whether implicit
or explicit.

b. In a case where the plaintiff invades or threatens to invade the the plaintiff’s right to, or enjoyment
of, property, the court may grant a permanent injunction where:

i. The defendant is trustee of the property for the plaintiff;

ii. there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual damage caused, or likely to be caused, by the
invasion;
iii. the invasion is such that compensation in money would not afford adequate relief;
iv. the injunction is necessary to prevent a multiplicity of judicial proceedings.

2) What is characterization?
A. ‘Characterization’ or the 'Classification of the cause of action' means the allocation of the question
raised by the factual situation before the court to its correct legal category. Its object is to reveal the
relevant rule for the choice of law. The rules of any given system of law are arranged under different
categories, some being concerned with status, others with succession, procedure, contract, tort and
so on, and until a judge faced with a case involving a foreign element, has determined the particular
category into which the question before him falls, he can make no progress, for he will not know what
choice of law rule to apply. He must discover the true basis of the claim being made. He must decide,
for instance, whether the question relates to the administration of assets or to succession, for in the
case of movables left by a deceased person, the former is governed by the law of the forum, the later
by the law of the domicile. Once the facts of a situation have been classified into their appropriate
legal category, the second stage arises namely the characterisation of rules of law.

Difficulties of Characterisation
There arise two difficulties in characterisation. In the first place, it may be a case near the line in which
it is difficult to determine whether the question falls naturally within this or that judicial category.
Secondly, it may be a case where English law and the relevant foreign law hold diametrically opposed
views on the correct characterization.

Nature of the problem of Characterisation/Classification in the Conflict of Laws

The problem of classification, like that of individual rules of law, assumes the character of a conflict - a
conflict between two legal systems involved in a case as to which shall be selected to define or to
classify the issue itself or any rule or right arising thereunder. The problem arises from three factors -

(1) Different legal systems attach to the same legal term different meanings. The conception of
domicile in Common Law and Civil Law countries is a typical example.
(2) Different legal systems may contain ideas and concepts completely unknown to one another, e.g.,
the English idea of the trust has no exact counterpart in Civil countries.
(3) Different legal systems apply different principles for the solution of problems which, in general
terms, are of a common nature, e.g., in succession to the goods of a deceased person, the rights of
the beneficiaries are in English law governed by the law of the testator's or intestate's domicile, while
in most continental countries, by the law of his nationality.

Theories of Characterization/Classification

1) The Lex Fori Theory [Characterization on the basis of the /Lex Fori]
Characterization on the basis of the lex fori was first propounded in 1891 by the German jurist, Franz
Khan, and six years later rediscovered by the French Writer Bartin, having as its chief modern
exponent the late Professor Niboyet of Paris. Bartin suggests that the problem of characterization can
be solved on the basis of the following two rules :

(i) A court dealing with the question of characterization, must invariably (subject to a few exceptions)
apply and decide the issue on the basis of internal law. When a court is called upon to characterize a
rule of foreign law, an institution, a legal relationship or some factual situation of a foreign country, it
must determine it on the basis of characterization made in its internal law, provided there exists a
corresponding rule, institution, legal relationship in the internal law. In case no such corresponding
rule, legal relationship or institution exists in the domestic law, it should be determined on the basis
of the closest analogy available in its internal law.

(ii) Once the court has determined that the law applicable is of a particular country or place, then the
court should apply that law as it is applied in that country or place, and it should also adopt any
subsidiary characterization as might be suggested by the law of the country or place.

2) The Lex Causae theory

Despagnet and Martin Wolff has propounded the theory of lex causae.

According to Wolff, ".... every legal rule takes its classification from the legal system to which it
belongs. French law classifies French legal rules, Italian law Italian rules, and an English court
examining the applicability of French rules will have to take the French Classification into
consideration. Of course, of English rule on conflict of laws can either expressly or implicitly forbid the
court to accept the foreign classification. Such exclusion may be based, for example, on principles of
justice of morality. But this will be a rare exception. To examine the applicability of foreign law
without reference to its classification is to fail to look at foreign law at all. Bartin and his followers
shut their eyes to good portraits and rest satisfied with a collection of caricatures."

3) Theory of Two Fold Characterisation (The Dual Theory of Lex Fori and Lex Causae)

The origin of this theory may be fathered on Prof. Cheshire and Dr. Robertson. Both the writers
maintain that problem of Characterisation can best solved by dividing the process of characterization
into Primary Characterization (for the lex fori) and Secondary Characterization (for the lex causae).
The term lex fori is used in its wider meaning by the protagonists of this theory. It does not mean the
domestic rules of the forum alone, but it includes the rules of private international law also.
In the words of Robertson, "The various legal categories, into one of which the judge must decide
that the question falls before he can select his conflict rule, must be wider than the categories of the
internal law, because otherwise the judge in a conflict question will be unable the make provision for
any rule or institution of foreign law which does not find its counterpart in his own internal law, and
thus one of the reasons for the existence of the science of conflict of laws will be defeated."

4) Comparative Law Theory [Characterization on the basis of Comparative Law]

Rabel and Beckett have propounded the view that characterization should be governed by the
analytical jurisprudence on the basis of comparative study of law. Beckett asserts that
characterisation must be based on analytical jurisprudence.
For the purpose of characterization, Beckett divided the cases into three classes, namely,
(i) cases not involving characterisation of a rule or institution of internal law;
(ii) cases involving characterization of rules or institutions of internal law, and
(iii) cases involving characterization of rules or institutions of foreign internal law.

The characterization of the first class of cases, according to Beckett is governed by the lex fori. As
regards to the second class of cases, he says, "In most cases the court will simply by applying the rule-
statutory or common law-of its internal law, in order to determine its application, its ordinary
principles of private international law which can in this connection only be interpreted in the light of
general jurisprudence." In respect of the third class of cases, he observes that it is essential that "the
court should not merely ascertain the purpose of this rule as a rule of internal law, but also that it
should ascertain in what circumstances it is applied by the courts of the country of whose legal system
it forms part... it is only when in possession of this information that a court is in a position to classify
the foreign rules or institutions.

5) The Autonomous Theory Wolff postulates a simple principle of classifying every legal rule according
to the legal system to which it belongs. According to his theory, where a foreign rule has to be
classified by the English Court, it should be done with reference to the whole foreign legal system. In
all cases the acceptance of the foreign classification is subject to overriding considerations of public
policy and morality of English law. Judicial decisions contain little support of this theory.

3) What is conflict of law

A. Each country’s legal system reflects its society’s values. As a result, national laws and the structure
of domestic judicial systems vary considerably from country to country. Nevertheless, many kinds of
legal situations or events, such as marriage, descendent estates, torts, and business transactions,
often are not confined to a single country or even to a single jurisdiction within a country. The courts
of each involved country may claim jurisdiction over the matter, and the laws of each involved
country may be applicable under certain circumstances. When such conflicts, or differences, exist,
procedures need to be in place to resolve them; the term conflict of laws (sometimes also conflicts or
conflicts law) describes the body of law of each country or state that is designed to resolve problems
arising from the differences between legal systems.

The three branches of conflict of laws are:

i. Jurisdiction- whether the forum court has the power to resolve the dispute at hand
ii. Choice of law- the law which is being applied to resolve the dispute.
iii. Foreign Judgements- the ability to recognize and enforce a judgement from an external forum
within the jurisdiction of the adjudicating forum.

i. Rules relating to jurisdiction of Courts

The first duty of a Court is to satisfy itself that it has jurisdiction to determine the matters before it
i.e.., whether it has power to adjudicate upon the case. This is ascertained by means of the rules of
Private International Law of the Country where the court is situated. The fundamental principle is that
the court may proceed to exercise jurisdiction over a case whenever the defendant, whether he is a
foreigner or not, is personally present in the country of the court at the time of service of the writ.
The law of procedure of every country lays down that in what matters which Court will have
jurisdiction. In India, Civil Procedure Code lays down that the court shall not proceed with the case
unless the service of summons is made on the defendant. This rule applies to all defendants, including
those who are living abroad. The question of jurisdiction is a fundamental question in all suits and
legal actions. However, in private international law, the jurisdiction has specific significance due to the
following two reasons:

a. In certain circumstances the court exercise jurisdiction in a case even when the defendant is
absent. For example, in a suit whose all elements are internal, the judgement rendered in the
absence of the defendant is as much enforceable as a judgement rendered in the presence of
the defendant.
b. There are certain matters in which the court cannot exercise jurisdiction even though the
defendant is present, such as in a petition for dissolution of marriage or in a suit relating to
immovable property situated abroad.

ii. Choice of Law

When the court comes to the conclusion that it has jurisdiction, then in a conflict of law case (ie., case
having foreign element) the question that arises is whether the law of the forum (ie., internal law) will
apply or whether some foreign law or foreign laws will apply. This is known as the question of choice
of law.

iii. Foreign Judgements

In some countries including India, Civil Procedural law lays down detailed rule regarding the
recognition and enforcement of foreign judgement. If the foreign judgement is a judgement of a court
of competent jurisdiction it will be accorded recognition even the foreign court made a mistake on
matters of law or fact. If the foreign judgement is not a judgement of a court of competent
jurisdiction, recognition is not given even if the foreign court correctly choose the applicable law and
correctly determined the facts of the case. The Status of foreign law Generally, when the court is to
apply a foreign law, it must be proved by foreign law experts. It cannot merely be pleaded, as the
court has no expertise in the laws of foreign countries nor in how they might be applied in a foreign
court. Such foreign law may be considered no more than evidence, rather than law because of the
issue of sovereignty. If the local court is actually giving extraterritorial effect to a foreign law, it is less
than sovereign and so acting in a way that is potentially unconstitutional. The theoretical responses to
this issue are:
a) that each court has an inherent jurisdiction to apply the laws of another country where it is
necessary to achieving a just outcome; or
b) that the local court creates a right in its own laws to match that available under the foreign law.
This explanation is sustainable because, even in States which apply a system of binding legal
precedents, any precedent emerging from a conflicts case can only apply to future conflicts cases.
There will be no ratio decidendi that binds future litigants in entirely local cases.
c) that the national court, when applying a foreign law, does not give an extra territorial effect but
recognizes, through its own -conflict of laws rule", that the situation at hand falls under the scope of
application of the foreign rule. In order to understand this argument one must first define the notion
of extraterritorial application of a rule. This notion is susceptible to two distinct meanings.

4) Short note on doctrine of renvoi

A. The Doctrine of Renvoi is the process by which the Court adopts the rules of a foreign jurisdiction
with respect to any conflict of laws that arises. The idea behind this doctrine is to prevent forum
shopping and the same law is applied to achieve the same outcome regardless of where the case is
actually dealt with.
“Renvoi” originates from the French “send back” or “return unopened”. The “Convention of Renvoi”
is the procedure by which the Court embraces the principles of an foreign law as for any contention of
law that emerges. Types of Renvoi:

Single Renvoi
Nations, for example, Spain, Italy, and Luxembourg work a “Single Renvoi” framework. For instance,
where a deceased benefactor, who was a French national, was an occupant in England yet domiciled
in Spain leaving moveable property in Spain, the Court may need to consider which authoritative
discussion will apply to manage the property under progression laws.
In single renvoi, a judge of a country is faced with conflicting rules of his country and sends the case
to the foreign country but according to the law of that country, the case is referred back to his
country and his country accepts sub reference and applies the law of his country.

In re Ross
Facts
The testatrix( the person who writes the will) was a British national, who was domiciled in Italy and
had written a will leaving the land in Italy and the movables both in Italy and England. Where will was
valid in England but not in Italy because she had not left half of her property to her son.

Judgment
Where the Court had applied the law regarding where the property is situated. The movables in Italy
because the testatrix (the person who writes the will) holds the Italian domicile. As a result, the Judge
had applied the Italian law with respect to the immovable property situated in Italy. As Italy did not
accept the renvoi based issue was decided in accordance with English law.

Double or total renvoi

Countries like Spain, England, and France follow double renvoi. For instance, let’s consider the
accompanying case whereby a deceased benefactor, an Irish national, residing in Spain, however,
domiciled in Italy, died and left some immovable property in France. France, being the law of the
gathering (where the advantages are arranged) will analyze the law of the person who died. Spanish
law watches the law of the deceased nationality which is Italy. Italy, as a ward that just works a
solitary renvoi framework, won’t acknowledge the Double Renvoi and almost certainly, right now will
apply Italian law.

Re Annesley Case
Facts
An English woman was domiciled in France for 58 years at the time of her death. According to the
principles of English law, she was domiciled in England. Before her death, she made a will, where the
will was valid as per the English law, but it was not valid as per the French law because she did not
leave 2/3rd of her estate to the children. According to the French law 2/3rd of the property goes to
their heirs. Where the France Court did not issue any authorization certificate that she was a French
domicile which was necessary for the acquisition of domicile.

Judgment
The Court said that it had applied the French law as she was holding the French domicile at the time
of her death. Based on that, the English Courts refer the matter to the French law as the law of
domicile and the French law also referred the same back to England as single renvoi is recognized in
France. Therefore, the French Court would accept the Remission and have applied the Internal law.

No Renvoi
Some countries like Denmark, Greece and the US do not accept double renvoi.

5) Explain lis pendens

A. Lis alibi pendens is a Latin term that means an action on the same cause of action is pending
elsewhere. According to Black’s Law Dictionary, the phrase “lis alibi pendens” is defined as a lawsuit
pending elsewhere. To translate from Latin, it literally means “dispute elsewhere pending”. It
sometimes happens that suits are begun between the same parties in more than one jurisdiction at
the same time. Under the received English law, the defendant can raise a plea of lis alibi pendens
whereby the court, in the exercise of its discretion, can order the plaintiff to discontinue the foreign
suit at the expense of forfeiting his claim in the forum court in the event of his disobeying the court
orders.
The rule governing the exercise of this discretion depends on the circumstances of the party raising
the plea. Where a plaintiff in the forum suit is also the plaintiff in the foreign suit and the two actions
are based on the same complaint against the particular defendant, the plea will be granted if the
defendant can establish that either of these actions has been instituted purposely to embarrass or
oppress him. The fact that proceedings are pending between a plaintiff and defendant in one court in
respect to a given matter is a ground for preventing the plaintiff from taking proceedings in another
court against the same defendant for the same object arising out of the same cause of action.
When two courts are hearing the same dispute they can reach inconsistent decisions therefore when
a case is pending, no other case on the same issue can be commenced in another court by the same
parties. However, when a case is filed about materially different issues, documents and parties, lis
alibi pendens can not apply to terminate the proceeding.

6) Explain locus regit actum

A. The maxim "locus regit actum" (the place governs the act) means that the validity of an act
depends on the law of the place where it is done. It is considered to be a maxim for resolving the
conflicts of law. The meaning of the maxim is that the place where a contract is entered into governs
the manner in which it shall be formally solemnized. The elasticity of the rule depends on the
following facts:

i. Place where the relevant facts have occurred.

ii. What are the relevant facts?
iii. To which transactions can the rule be applied?
iv. Does the local law govern exclusively?
Locus regit actum simply put is the municipal laws of the place where the facts occurred. This
principle has been universally recognized since the Middle Ages. It is not readily accepted in the
common law but is well-entrenched in the civil law. The law of the place of the act determines
absolutely, the forms of authentication. The law which governs the act as to its substance can
prescribe the authentication. It can be justified not only on grounds of tradition and authority, but
also by reason of obvious justice and convenience. In making their contract, the parties must be able
to rely on such legal advice as is available in the place where they are and such advice ( and
assistance)
is not necessarily obtainable with regard to any formalities except those of the local law. Observance
of the local form is thus sufficient to make the contract valid. The maxim locus regit actum also
applies to marriage. According to English Law no marriage is valid unless it has been celebrated in
accordance with the local form.

Case Laws
In Parwatawwa vs. Channawwa, the Karnataka High Court referring to Berthiaume v. Dastous, stated
that “If there is one question better settled than any other in international law, it is that as regards
“marriage – putting aside the question of capacity – locus regit actum.” The maxim means that the
validity of an act depends on the law of the place where it is done.

7) Nature and scope and subject matter of private international law

A. Private International Law describes the body of law surrounding which law governs when there is a
conflict between citizens of different countries. Private International Law establishes and deals with
the relationship between citizens/private entities of different countries. It is a collection of procedural
rules which determine which legal system and jurisdiction shall apply to a particular dispute. It
includes the proper venue for resolving their conflicts and the effect that a foreign judgement is to be
issued. It is primarily based on national or local legislation. Private International Law focuses primarily
on individual-to-individual or business-to-business ties.

Nature of Private international Law

The Private international Law is merely a foliage of municipal law of each State and is administered by
Municipal Courts and not by any International Judicial body. This is why, every country has its own
private international law However, private international law though a branch of municipal law, does
not deal with any other branch of law, but is concerned practically with every branch of law and thus
has a very wide ambit. Thus, Private international law is a branch of internal law of every counts But
private international law is that branch of law by reference to which no adjudication can be finally
determined. Private international law, by its very nature, merely indicates the governing law under
which a case is to be decided. For example, a Court is called upon to determine the validity of a
marriage performed between and Indian domiciled man and an English domiciled woman, the
ceremonies of marriage were performed in Paris. The Private International Law merely informs us
that the question as to capacity to marriage is to be determined by the law of the domicile of the
parties and the question of the performance of ceremonies is to be determined by the law of the
place where the marriage was solemnized. On knowing this, the court will decide the case
accordingly; if the question is of capacity the matter will be determined by reference to Indian law or
English law; or, if the question is whether requisite ceremonies were performed or not the court will
decide it by reference to French Law.

Scope of Private International law (Subject Matter of Private International Law)

Private International Law is a separate and distinct unit in Common Law system just as much as the
law of tort or of contract. but it possess this unity not because it deals with one particular topic, but
because it is always concerned with one or all of jurisdiction, choice of law and recognition and
enforcement of foreign judgement.
Frederic Harrison has said, "It starts up unexpectedly in any Court and in the midst of any process. It
may be sprung up like a mine in a plain common law action, in an administrative proceeding in equity,
or in a divorce case, or a bankruptcy case, in a shipping case, or a matter of Criminal Procedure. The
most trivial action of debt, the most complex case of equitable claims, may be suddenly interrupted
by the appearance of a knot to be united only by Private International Law."
 Although in India rules relating to jurisdiction of court and rules relating to recognition and
enforcement of foreign judgements are laid down in the Civil Procedure Code. Yet Indian Courts have
all along considered the jurisdiction of court and rules of choice of law as falling within ambit of
private international law. Thus India and other countries of the common law system consider the
following as the subject matter of Private International Law (or conflict of laws).

(1) Rules relating to jurisdiction of Courts

The first duty of a Court is to satisfy itself that it has jurisdiction to determine the matters before it
i.e.., whether it has power to adjudicate upon the case. This is ascertained by means of the rules of
Private International Law of the Country where the court is situated. The fundamental principle is that
the court may proceed to exercise jurisdiction over a case whenever the defendant, whether he is a
foreigner or not, is personally present in the country of the court at the time of service of the writ.
The law of procedure of every country lays down that in what matters which Court will have
jurisdiction. In India, Civil Procedure Code lays down that the court shall not proceed with the case
unless the service of summons is made on the defendant. This rule applies to all defendants, including
those who are living abroad. The question of jurisdiction is a fundamental question in all suits and
legal actions. However, in private international law, the jurisdiction has specific significance due to the
following two reasons:

i. In certain circumstances the court ow:mime jurisdiction in a case When the defendant is absent.
For example, in a suit whose all elements internal, the judgement rendered in the absence of the
defendant is as much enforceable as a judgement rendered in the presence of the defendant.

ii. There are Certain matters in which the court cannot exercise jurisdiction, even though the
defendant is present, such as in a petition for dissolution marriage or in a suit relating to
immovable property situated abroad.

In England, the question is not always confined to the jurisdiction of English Court. If an action is
brought in England upon a judgement that has been delivered, in France or if it claimed that the issue
is res judicata because of a foreign judgement, the first duty of English judge is to determine whether
the forego court was competent to pass judgement i.e, whether it had jurisdiction according to the
principles of English Private International Law to decide the matter Similar is the case in India too.
As to suits relating to personal status, India and the countries of common law system take the view
that courts of domicile have jurisdiction, while most of the countries of the civil law system take the
view that courts of nationality have jurisdiction. Now some countries, including the UIC, confer
jurisdiction on the courts of habitual residence.

(2) Choice of Law

When the court comes to the conclusion that it has jurisdiction, then in a conflict of law case (ie., case
having foreign element) the question that arises is whether the law of the forum (ie., internal law) will
apply or whether some foreign law or foreign laws will apply. This is known as the question of choice
of law.
The rules of English Private International Law indicate the particular legal system by reference to
which a solution of the dispute must be reached. Thus, for instance, English Private International Law
directs that if two parties who were married in France become domiciled in Germany. Where their
marriage is annulled fora reason that would not have been sufficient in France, shall be determined by
German law, or if a contract made in Italy between an Italian and an Englishman for delivery of grapes
to France is broken by failure to deliver, should the rights of the parties be determined in an English
Court according to Italian, English or French Law? The principles of Private International Law provide
the key to such intricate problems.
Private International Law merely inform as to which system of law, foreign or domestic, will govern
the matter. For instance, it is an established rule of Private International Law that immovables are
governed by the lex situs. The function of Private International Law ends once it has indicated that the
law of the place where the immovables are situated governs the matter. From now onwards the law
of the place where property is situated will take over the charge of the matter.
( I ) In the characterisation by English Law of concept of the jurisdiction and its bases, such as
domicile, the place where an act is done or the situation of property; and

In other specific case in the law of contract, on the other hand, the question of law is dependent on
that of jurisdiction in at least six important aspects. These are:
(i) action relating to land;
(ii) proceedings in divorce and, to a limited extent, in annulment of voidable marriage;
(iii) actions in respect of contracts containing an arbitration clause in favour of English arbitration;
(iv) actions in tort so far as concerns the test of whether the act committed abroad conforms in
character to a tort in the English sense;
(v) Admiralty damage actions; and
(vi) the entire law of procedure.

The effect of the existence of these exceptions from the general principle is that in cases in which they
arise the court is exclusively or substantially concerned with one only of the two questions of choice
of jurisdiction and choice of law, and not with both of them. It should be noted that it is not necessary
that suit will be governed only by one system of law. It can happen that on different aspects of the
suit, different systems of law apply. For example, in an adjudication in respect of a marriage,
questions of formal validity (ceremonies and rites of marriage) are regulated by lex loci celebrationis
(the law of place where the marriage was solemnized), question of capacity to marry by the lex
domicilli (law of the domicile of parties) and all matters relating to procedure by lex fori (the law of
the place where the trial takes place).

(3) Recognition and enforcement of Foreign judgements

Recognition and enforcement of foreign judgements are the matters, which comes under the
provisions of Private International Law. The Private International Law has to determine circumstances
in which and the basis on which foreign judgements are to be recognised.
As per Frederic Harrison, where there has been litigation abroad, but the defendant has most of his
assets in England, it will be important to ascertain whether English Law will recognise or permit the
enforcement of the foreign judgement Provided that the foreign court had jurisdiction to adjudicate
on the case, according to English Private International Law, the English Court will generally recognize
the foreign judgement as if one of its own and it can be enforced accordingly.
In some countries including India, Civil Procedural law lays down detailed rule regarding the
recognition and enforcement of foreign judgement. If the foreign judgement is a judgement of a court
of competent jurisdiction it will be accorded recognition even the foreign court made a mistake on
matters of law or fact. If the foreign judgement is not a judgement of a court of competent
jurisdiction, recognition is not given even if the foreign court correctly choose the applicable law and
correctly determined the facts of the case.