http://renvoi.wordpress.com/2008/03/10/when-is-a-substantive-limitation-period-not-substantive/ Canadian Conflict of Laws Blawg by Seva Batkin Tue, 20 Jan 2009 06:21:16 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 http://renvoi.wordpress.com/2008/03/10/when-is-a-substantive-limitation-period-not-substantive/#comment-16 John Swan Mon, 17 Mar 2008 18:26:35 +0000 http://renvoi.wordpress.com/?p=6#comment-16 There's a reason why characterization, renvoi and the "incidental question" are called "escape devices". Read what Castel & Walker say about characterization and how they justify its use in a "result-selective" way. If that is not a wholesale condemnation (if unintended) of the whole structure of conflicts analysis, I don't know what is. The Nova Scotia court was faced with a simple question of the interpretation of Nova Scotia law: did it apply in the circumstances (which, of course, included the Wyoming facts)? If it did, that's the end of the inquiry; if it didn't then some other rule, perhaps that of Wyoming, might. There is simply no place for "characterization" in the sense referred to by Castel & Walker. There’s a reason why characterization, renvoi and the “incidental question” are called “escape devices”. Read what Castel & Walker say about characterization and how they justify its use in a “result-selective” way. If that is not a wholesale condemnation (if unintended) of the whole structure of conflicts analysis, I don’t know what is. The Nova Scotia court was faced with a simple question of the interpretation of Nova Scotia law: did it apply in the circumstances (which, of course, included the Wyoming facts)? If it did, that’s the end of the inquiry; if it didn’t then some other rule, perhaps that of Wyoming, might. There is simply no place for “characterization” in the sense referred to by Castel & Walker.

]]>