Enlightenment For General Tort Conflicts Regulation In China From Oregon Choice-of-Law For Torts

As one of the common-law states in the United States of America,Oregon’s legislation in the field of tort conflicts,the Act on Choice of Law for Torts and Other Non-Contractual Claims,does not just represent the latest achievement that American torts conflicts law has achieved,but also embodies the characteristics of the contemporary American new conflict rules.Through the experiences accumulated during the judicial practice and absorbing the advantages of the common law,this law establishes flexible legislative mode of an organic combination of "method" and "rule".In the provisions of the general torts conflicts,the use of alternative connecting factors and flexible connecting factors,and the combination of regulations and escapes exception ensure the certainty and meanwhile add it with flexibility.The relevant provisions specify the rule of common domicile,lexi delicti,and the principle of party autonomy,and clarify what makes the applicable law the “most appropriate”.Both the legislation technology and its specific content can help us reflect the general torts conflicts rules of China,and provide certain references to our country,to improve the general torts conflicts regulation in the Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Application of Laws to Foreign-related Civil RelationsThe Law of the Applicable Law provides,respectively,the general tort liability,product liability,violations of the law of personality rights,as well as the unjust enrichment and negotiorum gestio.Article 44 of the law provides the general torts conflicts regulation,which also follows the modern method of combining the rule of common habitual residence,lexi delicti and party autonomy.However,this method is only briefly expressed in Article 44 without further explanation.This author thinks the major problems of China’s regulation of general torts conflicts include,too simple and loose in form and lacking clarity and well-established guiding principle in content.This paper adopts the method of comparative research,summarizing the characteristics of the general torts conflicts regulation of Oregon’s codification of torts conflicts and comparing with the relevant regulation of our country to find out the deficiencies of it,through which this author tries to accordingly find a way to improve our general torts conflicts regulation.This author thinks that the improvement should start from the specification of provisions,the clarification of the logical relations between the rules,the increasing of the flexibility of the conflict rules and clearing the content of the doctrine of the most significant relationship principle.