Alternative to Lex Rei Sitae Means of Regulating the Transfer of Property Rights in Private International Law

Introduction. The dominant way to regulate the transfer of ownership on movable property in international transactions is the lex rei sitae. However, the use of this connecting factor in conditions of mobile conflict is ineffective. Party autonomy in the real property law is a very controversial tool.

Methodology and materials. The purpose of the article is to assess the potential of alternative to lex rei sitae ways to define a real statute, as well as to consider approaches based on moving away from regulating the transfer of ownership on movables in international transactions in favor of regulating the risk of its accidental death. The methodological basis of the research is the analytical method, as well as special legal methods such as historical-legal, comparative-legal, formal legal. The research examines the works of foreign authors, both from common law and continental countries, as well as the works of domestic authors.

Results of the research and their discussion. The personal law of the owner cannot be recognized as an effective way to define a real statute due to the concept of “personal law” is understood differently in different jurisdictions. The law of the place of transaction does not correspond to modern realities, and also creates a vast space for abuse by unfair parties. The risk of accidental death can be an effective tool for regulating international transactions related to the acquisition of movables, however the range of such situations is significantly limited.

Conclusion. In conclusion, the article summarizes that none of the methods of regulating the transfer of ownership discussed in the article is an effective solution. Consequently, it is necessary to look for alternative options, for example, to introduce the substantive and legal autonomy of the will. However, the author acknowledges that this solution is complex and its implementation requires effort.

1. Asoskov, A. V. (2012) Conflict regulation of contractual obligations. M-Logos (In Russ.)  

2. Bazedow, J. (2022) Party autonomy in the regulation of international relations. Norma.  

3. Vol’f, M. (1948) Private International Law. Moscow, State Publishing House of Foreign Literature. (In Russ.)

4. Godunov, V. N., Meshchanova, M. V. (2022) Private law of the Republic of Belarus: the history of formation, development and prospects for improvement. In: Mikheeva L. Y. (eds.) Private law in the countries of the former USSR: the results of the 30th anniversary: collection of articles / Research Center of Private Law named after S. S. Alekseev under the President of the Russian Federation. Moscow, Statute. Pp. 152–190. (In Russ.)

5. Dozhdev, D. V. (2015) Assigning risk to the buyer in a classic sale and purchase. In: About property: A collection of articles for the anniversary of K. I. Sklovsky. Moscow, Statute, pp. 103–161. (In Russ.)

6. Knel’c, A. M. (2018) Synallagma in the contract. In: Egorov A. V., Novitskaya A. A. (eds.) Contracts and obligations: Collection of works by graduates of the RSHP at the S. S. Alekseev Research and Development Center under the President of the Russian Federation: in 2 volumes. Vol. 1: General part. Moscow, S. S. Alekseev Research and Development Center under the President of the Russian Federation (In Russ.)

7. Lyubarskaya, T. S. (2020) Autonomy of the will in determining the statute of real property in private international law: dissertation of PhD in law. Moscow State University named after M. V. Lomonosov. Faculty of Law (In Russ.)

8. Private international law. Collection of national codifications (2021) // V. V. Plekhanov (ed.). Statut (In Russ.)

9. Plekhanov, V. V. (2008) Transfer of ownership under the contract of international sale of goods: dissertation of PhD in law. Moscow State Law Academy (In Russ.)

10. Sakko, R. (2008) Transfer of ownership of movable property in the light of comparative law. In: Tuzov D. O. (eds.) Real rights: system, content, acquisition: collection of scientific tr. in honor of prof. B. L. Haskelberg. Statute (In Russ.)

11. Tserkovnikov, M. A. (2009) Acquisition of ownership of movable property through an agreement: French and Russian experience. Bulletin of Civil Law. No. 3. Pp. 102–141. (In Russ.)

12. Baxter, I. F. G. (1964) Conflicts of Law and Property. McGill Law Journal. Vol. 10, No. 1. Pp. 1–37.

13. Symeonides, S. (2016) Choice of law. Oxford University Press.

14. Van der Weide, J. (2011) Party Autonomy in Dutch International Property Law. In: Westrik R., Van der Weide J. (eds.). Party Autonomy in International Property Law. Munich, European law publishers GmbH. Pp. 41–58.