This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2015-09-23 |
JARDELEZA, J. |
||||
| We agree with CMI that there is a conflict-of-laws issue that needs to be resolved first. Where the facts establish the existence of foreign elements, he case presents a conflict-of-laws issue.[39] The foreign element in a case nay appear in different forms, such as in this case, where one of the parties s an alien and the other is domiciled in another state. | |||||
|
2007-11-23 |
NACHURA, J. |
||||
| Lex loci celebrationis relates to the "law of the place of the ceremony"[63] or the law of the place where a contract is made.[64] The doctrine of lex contractus or lex loci contractus means the "law of the place where a contract is executed or to be performed."[65] It controls the nature, construction, and validity of the contract[66] and it may pertain to the law voluntarily agreed upon by the parties or the law intended by them either expressly or implicitly.[67] Under the "state of the most significant relationship rule," to ascertain what state law to apply to a dispute, the court should determine which state has the most substantial connection to the occurrence and the parties. In a case involving a contract, the court should consider where the contract was made, was negotiated, was to be performed, and the domicile, place of business, or place of incorporation of the parties.[68] This rule takes into account several contacts and evaluates them according to their relative importance with respect to the particular issue to be resolved.[69] | |||||