Savigny argued for a more scientific approach, explaining that the challenge is to identify local law, which, in its natural nature, includes any legal connection, rather than classifying laws according to their purposes. Each legal relationship has its natural seat in a particular local law, and if that law differs from the law of the forum, that local law must be followed. In this situation, the registered office refers to the place of the object or, in the case of a person, to the place where he has his residence. The most remarkable strength of this theory is its attempt to resolve each disagreement in light of its unique circumstances and the most relevant body of law. It promotes compliance with the rules of the legal system to which the parties or objects in question logically belong. It can be argued that the theory of laws is the most traditional theory of private international law. Bartolus invented it in Italy in the 13th century. He is often cited as the founder of this theory. In order to reconcile the problems between the laws of the city-states and the Italian law in force at the time, he created the theory of statutes. According to the purpose of the law, the statutes were divided into two sections, called Statuta Personalia and Statuta Realia. In principle, the above-mentioned legal idea appears clear and simple. However, when the theory is applied in practice, it reveals several real-world problems that do not exist in theory.
It is difficult to determine whether something falls under Personalia or Realia in such a situation. It fits well into laws that deal with individuals because it includes people and their private affairs. However, it also makes land transferable, so it has the right to be covered by object laws. To solve this problem, Bartolus distinguished the two according to the linguistic structure of the legislation. If a person is mentioned for the first time in the wording of the articles of association, he or she is considered personalia. When an object is mentioned first, it is said to be under Realia. If it chose the right legal system, private international law had achieved its goal. Its regulations do not directly resolve the conflict, and an author of French once compared this branch of law to the information desk of a station, where a traveler can know from which platform a train departs. By definition, private international law only determines the applicable law to be applied in deciding a case. The following tasks fall within the scope of private international law: The body of treaties, model laws, national laws, legal manuals and other texts and instruments governing private interactions that cross international borders is referred to as “private international law”.
But the international context points more emblematically to the question of cultural difference. For example, various family law institutions in the Muslim world are currently excluded to varying degrees in Western legal systems because they do not fit into the dominant categories: a kafala is not an adoption, and the decision to wear a headscarf is not subject to the law that otherwise applies to a woman`s staffing level. The eighteenth century saw the beginning of significant international cooperation in the field of conflicts of laws, in addition to national progress in this field. Five South American nations sent representatives to the first international conference on the subject, held in Lima in 1887 and 1888, but failed to reach a binding agreement. The first South American Congress on Private International Law, held in Montevideo from August 1888 to February 1889, resulted in the first major multilateral agreements on conflicts of laws. Of the seven South American countries participating in the Montevideo Conference, eight treaties were drafted that essentially followed the theories of Friedrich Carl von Savigny and based their determination of applicable law on four different forms of factual contexts (domicile, place of object, place of transaction, place of jurisdiction). As Cheshire has said, “private international law is therefore the part of the law that comes into play when the case before a court concerns certain facts, events or transactions so closely connected with a foreign legal system that that that system must be resorted to”. The unification of private international law is necessary for two main reasons.
The principles of private international law established by different nations differ from each other, as do the national laws of different nations. Since the establishment of UNIDROIT at the League of Nations, the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT) has been working to modernize, harmonize and coordinate private law, in particular commercial law, among States and groups of States, and to formulate uniform legal instruments, principles and rules to achieve these objectives. The working languages of UNIDROIT, English and French, are both represented on its website, which provides the full text and details on the status of UNIDROIT conventions, such as: It is important to note that although conflict-of-laws rules often deal with international issues, local law is the relevant law. Indeed, unlike international law (more commonly known as ordinary international law), conflict of laws governs how countries deal with the internal affairs of individuals who have ties to multiple jurisdictions, rather than how countries deal with each other. There is no doubt that, as in other situations, international agreements to which a nation is a party may have implications for domestic law.