1、Property （必读）物权
The basic test for distinguishing "movables" and "immovables" is
how closely the particular interest is connected with land. If the
interest has any substantial relation to land, it is classified as an
"immovable" and the law of the situs of the land is applied.区分动产
和不动产的基础就是看这个特殊利益和土地的联系有多紧密。如果这
个利益和土地有任何实质性的联系则这个利益就被归类为不动产并
且适用物之所在地的法律。
The situs of land has traditionally been the most important and
prevailing "contact" with problems involving land or interests related
thereto, and there is a very strong public policy favoring the
application of that law to all such problems. Under the general view,
the forum would characterize an interest as "movable" or
"immovable" according to its own law, without reference to any
foreign law.物之所在地历来是最重要的并且是普遍的“联系”与涉及
土地或与之相关的利益的问题，并且有强有力的公共政策支持该法律
适用于所有这类问题。一般来说，法院把一个利益定性为动产或者是
不动产会根据自己的法律，而不会去参考任何外国的法律。
Immovables: Under the traditional rule, all rights are deemed to be
"created" by the law of the situs. To enforce those rights, the forum
court must therefore refer to the law of the situs.不动产：根据传统
规则，所有的权利都视为由 与该物所在地有关的法律创造的，为了
实现这些权利法院因此必须参考物之所在地的法律。
In practically all instances, the "most significant" contact or
relationship to any problem involving title to immovables is likewise
deemed to be with the situs of the property; thus, that law is applied.
几乎在所有情况下，对于涉及不动产物权的任何问题最显著的联系或
关系也同样被视为是该物权的物之所在地。因此该法被适用。The
policy-oriented approaches may place less emphasis on the situs
than do the above approaches, but a forum that is not the situs of
the land is also more apt to find itself "disinterested" so as to justify
reference to the "greater" interest of situs law. 这个以政策为导向
的方法也许更重视执行上述方法而不够重视物之所在地，但是一个法
院并不在物之所在地也更容易发现自己的无利害关系，所以就有理由
参考物之所在地法的更大的利益。Movables: Historically, either of
two different rules was applied to choice-of-law problems involving
movables, depending upon the nature of the problem. All questions
relating to testate or intestate succession of movable were
determined by reference to the law of the owner's domicile at death.
The Second Restatement reframes such choice-of-law rules by
providing that domicile is usually the "most significant" contact or
relationship with respect to succession and marital property
questions. 动产：历史上有两种不同的规则被应用到涉及动产的法律
选择问题，这取决于问题的性质。所有与动产的遗嘱继承或者非遗嘱
继承有关的问题由参考被继承人死亡时住所地法律来决定。第二次重
述通过提供住所地，这些通常是对于继承和婚姻财产最显著的联系或
者关系，来重组法律选择规则。
2、Expropriation （必读）征收
Expropriation: Expropriation in its strict sense usually concerns
individual transfers of ownership. This expropriation usually takes
place for reasons of general interest and is done properly when it is
coupled with compensation, determined by the executive power
and, if necessary, approved by the judiciary征收：. 征收严格意义来
说通常涉及个人所有权转移。这种征收基于普遍利益的原因发生并且
被实行的时候会做适当补偿，这是由行政权力决定的并在必要时经司
法部门决定。
Nationalization: Nationalization concerns the expropriation of a
complete sector of the economy and frequently affects the
expropriation of natural resource. It is generally done within the
framework of economical and political policy options and is formally
carried out, for instance by decree of the government.国有化：国有
化涉及各经济部门的征收并且经常影响自然资源的征用。它通常在经
济和政治政策选择的框架下进行并且正式执行，例如通过政府的法令
执行。
Confiscation: Confiscation is an expropriation which is considered
to be contrary to the rules of international law. For instance, an
expropriation without compensation for the investor is deemed to
be a confiscation. Expropriation intended as sanctions are
sometimes called confiscation.没收：没收被认为是违反国际法规则
的征收，例如，不用赔偿投资者的征收被视为没收。征收被作为制裁
时有时称为没收。
States can arrive at the same result as expropriation or
nationalization without openly admitting this. They may, for instance,
charge exceptionally high taxes or prohibit the repatriation of
money, or they may take over the management of a company, etc.
The consequences of these measures are virtually the same as
those of an overt expropriation or nationalization.各国通过征用或者
国有化都可以达到相同的结果只是没有承认这一点。例如，他们可能
征收收取高额的税或者禁止货币的遣返或者通过接管公司管理等等 `3、Contracts: General rules（必读）合同一般规则
Contract law has been a relatively stable area. The primary goal is
to protect the expectations of the parties as they engage in private
ordering of their affairs, although the past few decades have also
seen an increase in judicial limitation on freedom of contract in
order to protect individuals or state interests (e.g., covenants not to compete). 合同法一直是个相对稳定的区域。其主要目标是保护当事人的期望，作为他们参与其事务的私人秩序，尽管在过去十几年间可以看到在司法方面增加了对合同自由的限制，为了保护个人或者国家的利益等等像禁止合同竞争。The goal of facilitating private ordering which does not impinge on other strongly held interests exerts a major influence on choice of law in contracts.促进私人秩序的目的不是侵犯其他坚持的利益发挥重大影响在合同的法律选择上。
Sophisticated contracting parties often provide a choice-of-law clause in their contracts. These provisions, which reflect a policy generally styled “ party autonomy ” .先进完善的缔约双方通常提供法律选择条款在他们的合同中。这些条款反应了一个一般政策“当事人自治”政策。
4、Contract: the Traditional approach v. Modern Approaches（必读）合同：传统方法v 现代方法
The traditional approach传统方法
1.Validity 合法性
Express choice by the parties由当事人选择表示
Applicable law absent party stipulation: the vested rights-approach proceeded on the premise that rights and obligations of the parties “vested ” at a particular time And location, and that law of that place would therefore necessarily govern those Rights and obligations. 适用法律当事人缺席一方的规定：既得权利方法进行的前提是当事人权利和义务“既得”在特定的时间和地点，并且那些地方的法律必然要监管哪些权利和义务。Thus, a contract was valid if valid according to the law of the Place where it was made. The uniform rule of substantive contract law in the United States is that a contract is “made ”因此，一个合同被认为有效如果有效是根据作出有效决定这个地方的法律作出的。在美国，实质性合同法的统一规则是合同的“制造”。
when the offer is “accepted:”upon dispatch of the Acceptance(“mailbox rule ”) or upon its receipt when the “mailbox rule” does not apply.当要约被接受：因承诺的发送（邮箱规则）或者因其承认收到当邮箱规则没有被采用。
c.Exceptions: at times, the reference to the place of making or, to the place of intended Performance still will not validate the contract. Conversely, there may be policy reasons why the forum would not wish to apply a validating law to which its conflict rule refers.例外：有时参考要约发出的地点或者预期履行的地点仍不能验证合同。相
反，有可能是政策原因法院不会希望适用其冲突规则涉及确认的法律。
2.performance 履行
The traditional approach called for the application of the law of the place of performance for the determination of questions relating to: how performance was to be effected, excuse for nonperformance, breach, and damages. 传统方法称履行地的法律适用，对于有关问题的确定:履行是如何被实行的，不履行的借口，违约及损害赔偿。
II. Modern approaches现代方法
Express choice by the parties: all current approaches permit the parties, with limits, to choose the applicable law.当事人选择的表现：目前所有的方法限制允许当事人选择适用的法律。
The applicable law in the absence of an express choice没有明示选择法律适用
a. False conflicts: as in other areas, a contract employing a modern choice-of-law approach will ordinarily inquire whether a true or a false conflict exists.if the case presents a false conflict, no choice need be made: only one law claims applicability. 虚假的冲
突：在其他领域，合同采用一个现代法律选择方法一般会询问是否存在一个真实或者虚假的冲突。如果这种情况提出一个虚假的冲突就没有选择的必要；只有一种法律主张有适用性。
b. True conflicts: pure interest analysis---- interest analysis resolves true conflicts in favor of the forum when doing so is constitutionally permissible. 真实冲突：纯粹的利益分析---利益分析有利于解决真实的冲突当法院这么做时是被宪法允许的。
c.True conflicts: comparative impairment----the particular approach adopted by California is the comparative impairment test. It asks which state ’s policy and interest would be more impaired, as between two competing states, if its law were not applied.真实的冲突：相对损害--采纳加州特别的方法是相对损害测试。作为两个相互竞争的国家，它声称如果其法律不被适用国家政策和利益将会有更多损害。
d. Restatement Second: Most-significant-Relationship----parallel to its treatment of choice of law in tort, the Restatement—in section 188 incorporates by reference to the “general principles ” of section 6 in order to determine , with respect to a particular contract issue, the state of the most significant relationship.第二次重述：最显著关系----它与处理侵权时的法律选择平行，重述--对于一个特定的合同问题，在188条部分参考第6条部分的“一般原则”来
确定其最显著的关系状态。
5、Torts: overview（必读）侵权：概述
The “revolution ” in choice-of-law approaches has its principal origin in torts conflicts cases and, secondarily, in contract cases. Tort cases were an early area for concern because the traditional rules were thought to be mechanical, often leading to unjust results. Remember that negligent torts just happen; thus , there is no “party expectation ” that a particular law will apply. At most, parties may be surprised that a particular law is applied.法律选择方法的革命主要产生于侵权冲突案件中其次产生在合同案件中。侵权案件是最早被关注的领域因为传统规则被认为是机械的经常会导致不公正的结果。那时过失侵权行为刚刚发生因此没有“当事人期待”的特别法律被适用。充其量当事人会惊讶于特别法律被适用。
Modern approaches to choice of law in torts seek to achieve reasonable (just) results, taking account of both parties interests (e.g. compensation),while shielding the defendant from unfair surprise. 用现代方法在侵权中选择法律寻求达到合理的结果并考虑当事人双方的利益（例如补偿），而屏蔽来自被告的不公平或者意外。 Courts that have abandoned the traditional approach have not therefore necessarily embraced in full one of the competing
approaches. In answering exam questions you should therefore draw on and evaluate all contacts in terms of their relevance to the parties and to the policies of involved or interested states. Doing this seems less appropriate , at first blush, remember, however, that government-interest –analysis and false-conflict-analysis also have policy elements.摒弃传统方法的法院没有必要因此接受任何对抗的方法。在回答考试问题时你应该借鉴和评价有关联系在于他们相关的当事人和涉及的政策或者国家利益。乍一看这样做似乎不太合适，然而请记住政府利益分析和虚假冲突的分析都包含政治因素。
6、Product liability（必读）产品责任
Traditional approach: traditionally, the nature and extent of products liability(including both breach of warranty and tort liability) was determined by the place of wrong. Several past decisions held that the place of “wrong ” in such cases was the place where the product was manufactured, sold, or repaired, rather than the place of injury.传统方法：传统上的产品责任（包括违反保证和侵权责任两个方面）在性质和范围都有不确定的地方。在过去几次的决策中，“错误”的地方在这种情况下是指产品制造销售修理的地方而不是产生伤害的地方。
Modern approach: today, courts emphasize the interest in
protecting the consumer or user of any product in the“stream ” of commerce, and thus tend to look to the injured party’s domicile as the state having the “most significant” contact or interest( at least where this facilitates recovery).现代的方法：如今，法院着重保护任何产品的消费者或者使用者在商业中“流动”的利益，因此倾向于寻找受害当事一方的住所作为有最显著特征的联系或者利益情况。（至少这有利于恢复）
Comment: in this area, more than in any other, the courts tend to apply whichever law is most favorable to the plaintiff in order to facilitate compensation, while making their decision in terms of a “contacts ” or “ interests” approach.评论：在这个领域，相比于任何其他的，法院更倾向于适用最有利于原告的法律以便于补偿，同时使他们决定计算联系或利益的方法。
7、Torts: “most significant relationship” approach（必读）侵权：最密切联系方法
Recognizing the shortcoming of the rigid “place of wrong” rule, a number of authorities in recent years have opted “most significant relationship ” approach. Under this approach, the forum is directed to consider the “contacts ” and interests of each state involved and to apply the law of the state having the most significant
relationship with the particular issue before the court. 由于认识到“错误地点”这一僵化规则的错误，一些机关近几年来都采用“最密切联系”的方法。在这个方法中，法院针对考虑每个国家的“往来”和利益并且在法院之前适用与这个国家有最密切联系的特殊问题相关的法律
1. Application: a leading case establishing this position was Babcock v. Jackson.适用：形成这个立场的最重要的案件就是巴布科克诉杰克逊案。
2.What constitute “significant ” contacts:什么构成显著联系 According to the Restatement Second, the significant contacts to be isolated in a tort case are: (1)the place of injury; (2)the place of conduct; (3) the place of each party’s residence and/or business; and (4)the place where the relationship (if any) between the parties is centered. These contacts are to be evaluated according to their relative importance to the particular issue involved in the case, together with the various general factors and policies ( needs of interstate and international systems;relevant policies of forum; policies of other states involved and respective interests in having their policies applied; protection of justified expectations; basic policies underlying the particular field of law; certainty, predictability, and uniformity of result; ease in determination and application of
law to be applied). However, the Restatement retains the basic preference for the law of the place of injury, unless other factors establish a “more significant” relationship.根据第二次重述，在侵权案件中重大联系被分为1. 损害发生地2. 行为地3. 任意一方住所地或工作地4. 当事人间的关系最集中的地方。以上这些联系是要根据其与此案所涉及的问题的重要性以及综合各种政策和因素来进行评估的（洲际间的和国际系统间的需要，法院的相关政策；其他州所涉及的政策，他们各自的利益在政策上的应用；保护合理的预期；特殊领域潜在的政策法规；必然的，可预测的结果；逐步在于法律适用中适用的 ）。然而，重述对损害地保留着其特殊的偏好，除非其他因素建立了一个更多重大联系关系。
3. Criticism: in using this approach, different courts may reach different results by “weighing ” the “contacts ” differently.考证：在用运用此项政策时，不同法院会对联系的重要程度有不同标准。