1. A difference between the laws of different states or countries in a case in which a transaction or occurrence central to the case has a connection to two or more jurisdictions. — Often shortened to conflict. Cf. CHOICE OF LAW. [Cases: Action 17. C.J.S. Actions §§ 18–20; Conflict of Laws §§ 2–3, 12, 15, 20, 23, 27–32, 34–40, 42–48, 50–65, 96–97, 100, 102, 105–107.]
conflict of personal laws.
1. A difference of laws between a jurisdiction’s general laws and the laws of a racial or religious group, such as a conflict between federal law and American Indian tribal law.
2. A difference between personal laws. See PERSONAL LAW.
false conflict of laws.
1. A situation resembling but not embodying an actual conflict because the potentially applicable laws do not differ, because the laws’ underlying policies have the same objective, or because one of the laws is not meant to apply to the case before the court.
2. The situation in which, although a case has a territorial connection to two or more states whose laws conflict with one another, there is no real conflict because one state has a dominant interest in having its law chosen to govern the case — hence there is no real conflict.
3. The sit-uation in which the laws of all states that are relevant to the facts in dispute either are the same or would produce the same decision in the case. — Often shortened to false conflict.
2. The body of jurisprudence that undertakes to reconcile such differences or to decide what law is to govern in these situations; the principles of choice of law. — Often shortened (in sense 2) to conflicts.
— Also termed (in international contexts) private international law; international private law.“The phrase [conflict of laws], al-though inadequate, because it does not cover questions as to jurisdiction, or as to the execution of foreign judgments, is better than any other.” Thomas E. Holland, The Elements of Jurisprudence 421 (13th ed. 1924).
