Explanation
When the parties and the causes of action are local, the court will apply the lex fori, the prevailing municipal law. If there are "foreign" elements to the case, the forum court should under the conflict of laws consider whether it should apply one or more foreign laws.
For example, suppose that a woman domiciled in Scotland and a person habitually resident in France, both being of the Islamic faith, go through an Islamic form of marriage in Egypt while on holiday. This ceremony is not registered with the Egyptian authorities. They establish a matrimonial home in Algeria where they buy a house in the husband's name. The relationship breaks down and the wife returns to Scotland. When she hears that the husband is proposing to sell the house, she goes to the courts in Scotland. Is this:
- a case involving title to land where the lex situs, the law of the place where the land is situated, will be applied;
- a case to decide whether the Egyptian ceremony created a valid marriage under the lex loci celebrationis, the law of the place where the marriage was celebrated;
- a case to decide whether she has the status of a wife and so may seek matrimonial relief under the lex domicilii, the law of her domicile; or
- a case to seek divorce in which case the lex fori substantive family law will apply?
Assuming that the three relevant laws (the domicile and the forum is in Scotland) would give different results, the choice of the lex causae assumes major significance (see also incidental question).
Read more about this topic: Lex Causae
Famous quotes containing the word explanation:
“What causes adolescents to rebel is not the assertion of authority but the arbitrary use of power, with little explanation of the rules and no involvement in decision-making. . . . Involving the adolescent in decisions doesn’t mean that you are giving up your authority. It means acknowledging that the teenager is growing up and has the right to participate in decisions that affect his or her life.”
—Laurence Steinberg (20th century)
“Are cans constitutionally iffy? Whenever, that is, we say that we can do something, or could do something, or could have done something, is there an if in the offing—suppressed, it may be, but due nevertheless to appear when we set out our sentence in full or when we give an explanation of its meaning?”
—J.L. (John Langshaw)
“To develop an empiricist account of science is to depict it as involving a search for truth only about the empirical world, about what is actual and observable.... It must involve throughout a resolute rejection of the demand for an explanation of the regularities in the observable course of nature, by means of truths concerning a reality beyond what is actual and observable, as a demand which plays no role in the scientific enterprise.”
—Bas Van Fraassen (b. 1941)