Bill Text: IN HB1078 | 2011 | Regular Session | Introduced
Bill Title: Application of foreign law.
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Republican 1-0)
Status: (Introduced - Dead) 2011-01-05 - First reading: referred to Committee on Judiciary [HB1078 Detail]
Download: Indiana-2011-HB1078-Introduced.html
Citations Affected: IC 34-7-8.
Synopsis: Application of foreign law. Prohibits the enforcement of a
foreign law (defined as a law established and used outside the
jurisdiction of the United States) if the enforcement would violate a
right granted by the Indiana or United States constitution. Provides that
a provision in a contract or agreement between natural persons calling
for the application of foreign law is not enforceable and is void if the
provision cannot be modified. Prohibits a court from granting certain
motions to transfer a case to another jurisdiction if the transfer is likely
to affect the constitutional rights of the nonmoving party.
Effective: July 1, 2011.
January 5, 2011, read first time and referred to Committee on Judiciary.
PRINTING CODE. Amendments: Whenever an existing statute (or a section of the Indiana Constitution) is being amended, the text of the existing provision will appear in this style type, additions will appear in this style type, and deletions will appear in
Additions: Whenever a new statutory provision is being enacted (or a new constitutional provision adopted), the text of the new provision will appear in this style type. Also, the word NEW will appear in that style type in the introductory clause of each SECTION that adds a new provision to the Indiana Code or the Indiana Constitution.
Conflict reconciliation: Text in a statute in this style type or
A BILL FOR AN ACT to amend the Indiana Code concerning civil
procedure.
Chapter 8. Application of Foreign Law
Sec. 1. This chapter does not apply to a contract or agreement in which one (1) or more of the parties is not a natural person.
Sec. 2. As used in this chapter, "foreign law" means any law, rule, or legal code or system:
(1) established; and
(2) used or applied;
in a jurisdiction outside the states of the United States, the District of Columbia, or the territories of the United States.
Sec. 3. A court, arbitrator, administrative agency, or other adjudicative, mediation, or enforcement authority may not enforce a foreign law if doing so would violate a right guaranteed by the Constitution of the State of Indiana or the Constitution of the United States.
Sec. 4. (a) If any contractual provision or agreement provides for the choice of a foreign law to govern its interpretation or the resolution of any dispute between the parties, and if the enforcement or interpretation of the contractual provision or agreement would result in a violation of a right guaranteed by the Constitution of the State of Indiana or the Constitution of the United States, the agreement or contractual provision shall be modified or amended to the extent necessary to preserve the constitutional rights of the parties.
(b) Any contractual provision or agreement incapable of being modified or amended in order to preserve the constitutional rights of the parties in accordance with this chapter is void.
Sec. 5. (a) If a contractual provision or agreement provides for the choice of venue or forum outside the states of the United States, the District of Columbia, or the territories of the United States, and if the enforcement or interpretation of the contract or agreement applying that choice of venue or forum provision would result in a violation of any right guaranteed by the Constitution of State of Indiana or the Constitution of the United States, that contractual provision or agreement shall be interpreted or construed to preserve the constitutional rights of the person against whom enforcement is sought.
(b) A court may not grant a motion of forum non conveniens or a related motion:
(1) in a case in which a natural person subject to personal jurisdiction in Indiana seeks to maintain an action in Indiana; and
(2) if the court finds that granting the motion violates or would likely lead to the violation of the constitutional rights of the nonmovant in the foreign forum with respect to the matter in dispute.
