Governing Law Clauses
Last Review
Last Update
Statutes
"The parties to any contract or agreement relating a transaction of at least $250,000 may agree that the law of this state governs their rights and duties in whole or in part, whether or not the contract or agreement bears a reasonable relation to this
state. This, however, does not apply to any contract or agreement for labor or personal services; relating to any transaction for personal, family or household services; or to the extent providedfor in section 1--301 of the Uniform Commercial Code. NY General Obligations ยง5-1401"
Cases
"While labor and personal services contracts are exempt from this rule, New York does
not otherwise recognize a public policy exception to its application regardless
of whether the application of New York substantive law may offend the public
policy of another jurisdiction.Supply
& Bldg. Co. v. Estee Lauder Int'l Inc, 2000 WL 223838 (S.D.N.Y. Feb.
25, 2000).While § 5-1401
establishes a mandatory choice-of-law rule when a contract designates New York
law, when a choice-of-law provision designates the law of another jurisdiction,
New York will follow the traditional rule honoring the parties' choice of law
unless the chosen jurisdiction bears ""no substantial relationship""
with the parties or the transaction and there is ""no other reasonable
basis"" for the choice (nexus test), or unless application of the law would
offend a ""fundamental policy"" of a state with an interest in the
transaction materially greater than that of the chosen jurisdiction and whose
law would apply in the absence of an effective choice of law by the parties
(fundamental policy test). Radioactive J.V. v.
Manson,
153 F. Supp.2d 462, 469-470 (S.D.N.Y.2001)."
Comments
It has been noted by
some federal courts, however, that while General Obligations Law § 5-1401
supersedes common-law conflicts principles, it is not without its limits and
must still remain within the constitutional bounds of due process and the Full
Faith and Credit Clause. See Lehman Bro.
Comm'l Corp. v. Minmetals Internat'l Non-Ferrous Metals Trading Co., 179
F.Supp.2d 118 (S.D.N.Y. 2000).
Contributors
Julia Gavrilov
The statutory information was edited and reviewed with the support of MultiState
Become a Content Contributor
The State Law Compendium is made possible through the cooperation, dedication and ongoing efforts of attorney’s who provide and update its statues, cases and comments.
Attorneys who would like to volunteer to develop or update compendium content are welcome to contact us to learn more.