Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs
(or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
|English to English translations [PRO]|
Law/Patents - Law: Contract(s) / governing law
|English term or phrase: without giving effect to conflict of laws|
|What does this phrase "without giving effect to conflict of laws" mean?|
Without considering ...?
Governing Law: The Contest and the rights and obligations of all entrants and Submissions shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, without effect to any principles of conflicts of law, and the federal law of the United States.
Of Virginia laws and principles of conflicts of law, which will take precedence?
How should I interpret the phrase "without giving effect to conflict of laws"?
This language is used to say that the preceding statement is legal and binding - UNLESS it is in conflict with a current or future law in which case that law would prevail (and set the precedence for that area of the contract).
Is this explanation correct in this web link?
|without regard to the choice of law provisions|
A very good explanation below.
Conflict of Law Provisions
Everyone has seen it in their contracts and wondered what it means. It is always in the miscellaneous section at the end of agreements. It usually says something like, “without regard to the conflicts of law provisions therein.” The full text is “This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Texas, without regard to the conflicts of laws provisions therein.” Why is it included?
This provision is used to take interpretation of an agreement outside of the state law where a cause of action occurs. For instance, if you have an agreement with a company that is in California there could be a cause of action that arises in California. However, you want the laws of Texas to apply. You have added a “choice of law” provision for that very reason. Unfortunately, most states have a rule that says the law of the state where the cause of action arose governs that cause of action. This would mean that if the cause of action happened in California, even if you said you wanted Texas law to aply, Texas law would point back to California. By adding the "without regard to the conflicts of law provision" we are able to negate the Texas law that points back to California. that is why most choice of law provisions contain the described clause and you should think about verifying that your's does too.
Note added at 19 hrs (2010-07-27 19:32:38 GMT)
It should be "the choice-of-law provisions" but this expression is rarely hyphenated.
Selected response from:
Local time: 02:33
|Thank you very much.|
4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer
2 days15 hrs confidence:
Return to KudoZ list
|Changes made by editors|
|Aug 11, 2010 - Changes made by Polangmar:|
|Edited KOG entry||<a href="/profile/67316">Edward LIU's</a> old entry - "without giving effect to conflict of laws" » "without regard to the choice of law provisions"|
|Aug 1, 2010 - Changes made by Polangmar:|
|Field (specific)||Law: Patents, Trademarks, Copyright » Law: Contract(s)|| |
KudoZ™ translation help
The KudoZ network provides a framework for translators and others to assist each other with translations or explanations of terms and short phrases.
Search millions of term translations