25th November, 2023 - 7:10 am Categories: Lex Causae 0 Comments

Introduction

The dynamics of modern legal systems are increasingly characterized by the transnational nature of disputes, necessitating a profound examination of the principles guiding jurisdiction and procedure. At the heart of this inquiry lies the intricate interplay between Lex Fori, the law of the forum, and international civil procedure. Lex Fori, rooted in historical and theoretical foundations, encapsulates the legal framework of a jurisdiction, dictating the procedural rules that govern civil litigation within its boundaries. This paper initially sheds a light on what exactly is Lex Fori and how it has been defined in the international context. Further, the paper delves into the details of Lex Fori and the exception to it that is Lex Causae and explains the interplay between both the concepts. Moreover, the paper explores how the principles of Lex Fori intersect with international civil procedure, scrutinizing the challenges posed by conflicts of laws, jurisdictional determinations, and the imperative of judicial efficiency. Lastly, various conventions have been discussed in the paper with relation to the international civil procedure, including Hague Convention on the Civil procedure along with cases from various jurisdictions.

Lex Fori: Meaning & Definition

Every country has its own set of regulations pertaining to private international law. Consequently, the contrasting private international standards provide a challenge in the period of expanding cross-border legal exchanges. Reducing legal system variations can help cope with these repercussions by minimising expenses and anguish associated with legal dispute. This way, the “rules of the game” remain the same or comparable regardless of the participants’ location. The word “harmonisation” refers to the endeavour to lessen distinctions across national legal systems. Harmonising procedural law has advanced far less than substantive law, which has been the focus of the majority of harmonisation efforts. Despite this, the Hague Conventions have been crucial in addressing different issues of procedural law. Literally translated, “Lex Fori” refers to the laws of the forum or the jurisdiction in which the matter is being heard.  It is firmly established that the forum’s law is the only one that applies to all procedural matters.  This is because jurisdiction is the execution of one of sovereignty’s powers, namely the ability to apply the law as it already exists to specific circumstances. Therefore, it would be absurd for the laws of one state to govern how its officials exercised their jurisdiction over another. Procedure law governs how jurisdiction is exercised. Kahn[i] and Bartin[ii] in the 1890s. It is a well accepted notion that the English Courts have also accepted and applied. One approach to solving the characterization problem is to use the Law of the Forum, or Lex Fori theory. The conflict of laws issue is governed by the notion of characterization. A court can determine which law applies to a given situation by using the principle of characterization. Applying the proper conflict of law rule will be impossible until and until the same is resolved. According to the idea, a given situation should be characterised in line with both relevant domestic laws and international legal norms that are in line with the closest and most nearby domestic laws.

Interpretation Of The Principle Of Lex Fori

The term ‘Lex Fori’ literally means the law of the forum or the law of the jurisdiction where the case is pending.[iii] It is well settled that all the mattes appertaining to procedure are governed exclusively by the law of the forum.[iv]This is because jurisdiction is the execution of one of sovereignty’s powers, namely the ability to apply the law as it already exists to specific circumstances. Therefore, it would be absurd for the laws of one state to govern how its officials exercised their jurisdiction over another. Procedure law governs how jurisdiction is exercised. Procedure is the legal method used to fairly administer remedy for violations and enforce obligations and rights recognised by substantive law. Procedure establishes how a lawsuit is filed, how it is answered, how evidence is gathered, how a case is decided in court, and how a judgement is enforced. Because procedural law regulates the public service of rendering justice, it can only be regulated by the law of the forum. Under certain circumstances, the judicial authority will apply foreign law to the merits of the dispute. As Cheshire puts it- “The substantive rights of the parties to an action may be governed by a foreign law, but all matters appertaining to procedure is governed exclusively by the law of the forum.”[v]

[Image Sources: Shutterstock]

In cases that have foreign elements–such as the nationality or the domicile of the parties, or the place of the execution or performance of a contract–the judicial authority of the forum will abide by its conflict of laws rules to determine the application of foreign law to the substantive aspects of the dispute.[vi] However, even in cases where foreign law is applicable to the merits, the law applicable to procedure is the law of the forum.

Following this logic, the following conclusion can be drawn: in certain situations, local substantive law may be derogated from and applied in favour of foreign law. Yet, as the local judicial authority will only apply the forum’s procedural norms, local procedural law generally cannot be violated by international law. As a result, local procedural law applies to both domestic and foreign-related cases. According to the idea, a given situation should be characterised in line with both relevant domestic laws and international legal norms that are in line with the closest and most nearby domestic laws. If there are domestic components in a case, the court will apply domestic laws, however when foreign elements like domicile are involved, the Court must consider three main things:

1. Whether the particular Court has the jurisdiction to try the case
2. Characterisation of the issues
3. Choice of law to be applied in the issues so categorised.

Unless there is a foreign element involved or the parties object, the court that has jurisdiction over the matter normally decides the case in line with its own domestic laws. Since the forums legislation is thought to be superior in accordance with the better-law approach, the Court believes that it is in their best interest to have their own law enforced.

Bartin argues in support of the Lex Fori approach, arguing that judges and courts are only able to manage their own legal system since they are sworn to uphold its obligations and no one else’s. In order to avoid confusion about which forum laws should be used, the choice of law should only be the one that directs the Court of Jurisdiction’s concerns.[vii] In case there is no corresponding law in the Lex Fori, the Court must apply rules of a similar law which exist in its jurisdiction.

Author: Ipsita Sinha, in case of any queries please contact/write back to us via email chhavi@khuranaandkhurana.com or at Khurana & Khurana, Advocates and IP Attorney.

References

[i]Vol. no. 30, F. Kahn, Gesetzkelten, JehringsJahrbucher (1891).

[ii]F. Bartin, De LeimpossibiliteDearrivere La Suppression Definitive Des Conflits des Lois (1897).

[iii]Black’s Law Dictionary (8th ed. 2004)

[iv]Cheshire and North’s Private International Law, pg. 68

[v]Cheshire and North’s Private International Law, pg. 67

[vi]It is well settled that the substantive rights of the parties to an action may be governed.

[vii]Id. At 2.