冲突规则的重构——以美国《第三次冲突法重述》为视角

Reconstruction of Conflict Rules—— Baesd on the Third Restatement of Conflict Law in the United States

基于《第二次冲突法重述》存在的缺陷、对冲突法革命进行反思与总结之需及国际因素的深化等原因,美国法学会已启动的《第三次冲突法重述》的编纂工作无疑是必要的,其也代表了美国冲突法的新发展。在理论基础方面,为实现法律适用的确定性目标,《第三次冲突法重述》应摒弃《第二次冲突法重述》的折中主义,在以法律关系地域化方法为理论基础的前提下,适当吸纳现代选法理论。在具体规则方面,应反思《第二次冲突法重述》第6条规定的开放式冲突规则,改进第145条与第188条规定的连结点集群式冲突规则,以及软化以第233条为代表的硬性冲突规则。美国冲突法的新发展表明,选法理论的多元化成为当代冲突法发展中的一种客观现象,当今冲突法仍然需要在确定性与个案正义之间寻求适当平衡,司法本地化的狭隘思维应被摒弃。

Due to defects of the Second Restatement of Conflict of Law,the need for reflection and summary of the conflicts revolution,and the deepening of international factors,it is necessary for the codification of the Third Restatement of Conflict Law had been launched by American Law Institute,and such compiling work also represents the new development of American conflict law. In terms of theoretical basis,the Third Restatement should abandon the eclecticism which embodies in the Second Restatement,and appropriately absorb the modern choice-of-law theories under the premise which based on the approach of regionalization of legal relationships in order to realize the goal of certainty. In respect of specific rules,the open style conflict rule stipulates in Article 6 and the grouping-of-contacts conflict rules in Article 145 and 188 of the Second Restatement should be improved,and the black-letter rules represented by Article 233 of the Second Restatement also should be softened. The new developments of American conflict law indicate that the pluralism of choice-of law theories become a kind of objective phenomenon in contemporary development of conflict law,conflict law still needs to find a proper balance between certainty and individual justice nowadays,and the parochial judicial localization should be abandoned.