contract-law
Why is &quot;without regard to conflict of law&quot; necessary?
<p>I often see governing law clauses that state something like</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>The contract is to be governed in accordance with the law of the State
  of California without regard to any conflict of law principles</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I red <a href="https://www.deallawwire.com/2017/05/16/governing-law-clauses-without-regard-to-conflict-of-law/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this article</a> but still don't see why it's necessary. The intent is clear. No one would put this in without intending to mean it. </p>

<p>The article says such clauses prevent against courts simply not following the choice of law, and also preventing "renvoi" but isn't that the same thing? I don't see how there are two different things the "without regard..." prevents. </p>

<p>The first part about the choice of law is normally referring to what law of the country or state that the party intends.</p>

<p>The renvoi part is saying that if there is a conflict, that laws involving foreign juridictions should not be consulted to end the dispute. </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Second, it prevents a renvoi which would allow for a court to refer to laws involving foreign jurisdiction in a conflict of law analysis. The author indicates that this is important for ensuring that the intention of the parties are maintained.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>The foreign part is the key difference.</p>

<p>The chief problem at hand here is that California law (or any other system) cannot reasonable foresee the wide array of legal situations that have originated elsewhere. If a lawsuit results from a series of actions in different jurisdictions, there is a possibility for a conflict of law. Many jurisdictions allow judges to take the other law systems into account, certainly when they're generally seen as compatible (as is common for US and EU states)</p>

<p>The terms of this contract state that the laws of California apply <em>exclusively</em>. Even if further actions in scope of the contract would happen in other states, the laws of those states do not apply.</p>

<p>Note however that the "excluded jurisdiction" may have different ideas. For instance, the EU states that the GDPR applies even to such a contract.</p>
