Legal Definitions - whole law

The term whole law refers to the complete set of legal principles that a court applies when it is hearing a case that involves legal issues spanning multiple states or countries.

When a court in one jurisdiction (known as the "forum court") handles such a case, its first step is to use its own "choice-of-law rules" to determine which jurisdiction's laws should govern the dispute. Once a governing jurisdiction is identified, applying the "whole law" means that the forum court will consider all the relevant legal principles of that chosen jurisdiction. This includes not only its substantive laws (the rules directly related to the dispute, such as contract law or personal injury law) but also that jurisdiction's own choice-of-law rules. This comprehensive approach ensures that the legal outcome is as consistent as possible with what would happen if the case were heard in the chosen jurisdiction itself.

Here are a few examples to illustrate this concept:

• International Contract Dispute: Imagine a company based in Canada signs a software development contract with a developer in India. The contract specifies that any disputes will be governed by the laws of England. If a disagreement arises and the Canadian company sues the Indian developer in a Canadian court, the Canadian court (the forum court) would first apply its own choice-of-law rules. These rules might lead the court to respect the contract's clause choosing English law. Therefore, the Canadian court would then apply the whole law of England. This means it would not only apply English contract law principles but also consider any English choice-of-law rules that might, for instance, refer to the law of another country for specific aspects of the contract's performance or validity.

• Cross-Border Inheritance: Consider a person who lived in Texas but owned a vacation home in Mexico. After their death, a dispute arises in a Texas court regarding the distribution of the Mexican property according to their will. The Texas court (the forum court) would use its choice-of-law rules, which typically dictate that the law of the location of real estate governs its inheritance. Thus, the Texas court would decide that Mexican law applies to the Mexican property. The court would then apply the whole law of Mexico, which includes not only Mexico's inheritance laws but also any Mexican choice-of-law rules that might, for example, refer back to the law of the deceased's domicile (Texas) for certain aspects of the will's interpretation.

• Multistate Personal Injury: Suppose a resident of Oregon is involved in a car accident in Idaho with a driver from Washington. The Oregon resident decides to sue the Washington driver in an Oregon court. The Oregon court (the forum court) would apply its own choice-of-law rules to determine which state's law governs the personal injury claim. Oregon's rules might point to the law of the place where the accident occurred, which is Idaho. Therefore, the Oregon court would decide that Idaho law applies. The court would then apply the whole law of Idaho, meaning it would consider Idaho's tort law principles (e.g., rules on negligence, damages) as well as any Idaho choice-of-law rules that might, for instance, refer to the law of the plaintiff's home state (Oregon) for specific issues like the calculation of certain types of non-economic damages.