| In the field of private international law, there has always been an iron curtain standing between the common law and the civil law countries during the past centuries, which is made of nationality principle on one side and domicile principle on the other side. Although each principle tries to promote its spiritual connotations by legally constructing the concept of nationality or domicile, the spiritual foundations of nationality principle may be generalized as nationalism, completion of personality and liberation of spirits, while the pursuit of domicile principle is to grant individual freedom to choose their personal law by choosing their domiciles. Nationality principle is colored by the unilateral approach in its history, with a tendency to enlarge the scope of the forum’s personal law, and is favorable to protect the basic civil rights of its citizens. The domicile principle contributes to the equality and consistency of individuals’ civil status, and helps to harmonize various ethnic peoples in the same country. Compared with domicile principle, nationality principle is unable to coordinate the whole private international law system.In China, the fundamental transition from nationality principle to habitual residence as the connecting factor of personal law should be put in the context of the rival and competition between the two principles to understand its implications and to predict its evolving directions. Habitual residence is the result of compromise in international conventions, and has the disadvantages of cutting apart the spiritual connection between individual and a specific country. Considering the trans-border movement of Chinese citizens, the habitual residence in China may well develop towards domicile to pursue the values embodied in domicile principle. |
京公网安备11010102006664号 京ICP备2023015853号