This article provides a comprehensive theoretical and legal analysis of the peculiarities of state participation as a specific entity in private international law relations. the author examines in detail the legal content and key types of international private legal relations, focusing on the legal nature of conflicts of law that inevitably arise between participants in cross-border transactions. Particular attention is paid to the mechanism for resolving such conflicts based on modern instruments of conflict regulation that take into account the public status of the state. The paper notes the rapid growth in the importance of the fundamental principle of autonomy of the parties’ will (lex voluntatis). The transformation of the methodology of private international law is examined: the gradual transition from static “rigid” conflict of laws rules to dynamic “flexible” criteria, such as the principle of the closest connection (the closest connection). This approach allows the court to more effectively take into account the balance of interests between private investors and sovereign states.

A separate section is devoted to the analysis of the processes of global unification of substantive and conflict-of-law rules carried out within the framework of international organizations (UNCITRAL, The Hague Conference). The author argues that increasing the role of autonomous choice of law by the parties to legal relations significantly minimizes legal uncertainty. The article clearly shows the impact of these trends on the transformation of the institution of state immunity. In particular, it analyzes the transition from the absolute to the limited theory of state immunity, where the latter is considered an equal partner in commercial transactions (acta jure gestionis). It concludes that modern conflict of laws regulation is evolving towards the creation of a transparent and predictable environment for the protection of the subjective rights of all participants in international civil circulation.

Authored books

1. Brownlie I, Principles of Public International Law (6 ed. Oxford University Press 2003) 323.

2. Collier J G, Conflict of Laws (Cambridge University Press 2001) 191 https://doi.org/10.1017/ CBO9781139164627.

3. McClean D, Morris: The Conflict of Laws (Fourth ed, Sweet&Maxwell Ltd 1993) 261.

4. North P, Fawcett J, Cheshire and North’s Private International Law (Butterworths 1999) 8.

5. Schmitthoff M C, Schmitthoff’s Export trade: the law and practice of international trade (9th ed., Steven 1990).

6. Dovgert A, Mizhnarodne pryvatne pravo: zmina kontseptsii (Alerta 2024) (in Ukrainian). pravoua.com.ua 56 Євген Попко

Edited books

7. Lillich R B (ed), The Valuation of Nationalized Property in International Law (Charlottesville 1972).

8. Mizhnarodne publichne pravo: pidruchnyk: u 2 t. T. 1: Osnovy teorii (V Mytsyk (red), Pravo 2019) (in Ukrainian).

9. Problemy pravovoho rehuliuvannia komertsiinykh vidnosyn v umovakh yikh internatsionalizatsii (O Krupchan (red), Pidruchnyky i posibnyky 2007) (in Ukrainian).

Journal articles

10. Cordero-Moss G, ‘Limits to Party Autonomy in International Commercial Arbitration’ [2014] 1(1) Oslo Law Review 47–66 https://doi.org/10.5617/oslaw979.

11. Edwards A B, ‘Statutism: the historical antecedents’ [2007] 13(1) Fundamina: A Journal of Legal History 28.

12. Shapira A, ‘A Transatlantic Inspiration: The “Proper Law of the Tort” Doctrine [1970] 33(1) The Modern Law Review 17–33 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1970.tb01249.x.

13. Spiro E, ‘The Proper Law of the Contract and Renvoi: Further Comments on the Amin Rasheed Shipping Case’ [1984] 33(1) International and Comparative Law Quarterly 199–202 https://doi.org/10.1093/iclqaj/33.1.199.

14. Volken P, ‘How common are the general principles of private international law? America and Europe compared’ [1999] I Yearbook on Private International Law 94–97 https://doi. org/10.1515/9783866537125.1.85.

15. Vyhovskyi O, ‘Urehuliuvannia novykh instytutiv mizhnarodnoho pryvatnoho prava v onovlenii tsyvilno-pravovii kodyfikatsii Ukrainy’ [2020] 6 Pravo Ukrainy 88 https://doi. org/10.33498/louu-2020-06-082 (in Ukrainian).

Theses

16. Dzera Yu, ‘Derzhava yak uchasnyk tsyvilnykh pravovidnosyn’ (dys kand yuryd nauk, 2011) (in Ukrainian).