?
Коллизионное регулирование договорных обязательств в штате Орегон (США)
The Russian law doctrine practically has no researches on the US statutory law of the Private International Law (hereinafter – PIL), though the latter country has never fallen off the global processes of the PIL codification, and in some states of the USA codified statutes are the main source of the choice-of-law rules. Of particular interest in the manner of speaking is the Oregon’s legislation, where two acts on the choice-of-law regulations for contracts and torts were enacted comparatively recently (in 2001 and 2009 consequently, last revised in 2013). This article is about the Oregon’s Choice-of-law Statute for Contracts (2001, last revised in 2013). This Act codifies the Oregon’s case law; the structure of the Act reflects its “judicial orientation”, i.e. goal-setting as a roadmap for judges. At the same time the Act is “scientifically oriented” and its provisions reproduce the most successful doctrinal progresses of the American Choice-of-Law Revolution. The rules of the Act are based on a synthesis of flexible conflict approaches and particular choice-of-law rules. The general approach is an enforcement of the “most appropriate” law, simultaneously providing presumptions that are based on traditional principles of territorialism and personalism. It is concluded that the Oregon’s legislator has achieved the optimal balance between flexibility and predictability of the choice-of-law regulations for contracts.