top of page




DOI: 10.24031/1992-2043-2018-18-3-261-284

The dualistic theory of the correlation between the national legal orders and international
law has been firmly established within the legal academia both in Russia and abroad.
Among other things, the dualistic orthodoxy has certain ramifications with regard to the
understanding of the private international law. The authors’ claim is that the influence
of the dualism is negative in this regard. In a sense the dualistic orthodoxy marginalizes
the private international law, both as a discourse and as a technique of regulation.


Keywords: legal dualism; legal pluralism; rule of conflict of laws; transnational


Boden D. Le pluralisme juridique en droit international privé // Archives de
Philosophie du Droit. 2005. Vol. 49.
Bureau D., Muir Watt H. Droit international privé. T. 1. 2nd ed. Paris: Presses universitaires
de France, 2010.
D’Amato A.A. Concept of Custom in International Law. Ithaca and London: Cornell
University Press, 1971.
Deby-Gérard F. Le role de la règle de conflit dans le règlement des rapports internationaux
// Bibliothèque de droit international privé. Vol XVI. Paris: Dalloz, 1973.
Goldsmith J.L., Posner E.A. The Limits of International Law. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2006.
Jacquet J.-M. La fonction supranationale de la règle de conflit de lois // Recueil
des Cours de l’Academie de Droit International de la Haye. Vol. 292. The Hague;
London; Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2001.
Kahn F. Die Lehre von ordre public // Abhandlungen zum internationalen Privatrecht.
Bd. 1. München; Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot, 1928.
Koskenniemi M. From Apology to Utopia: The Structure of International Legal
Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Koskenniemi M. The Gentle Civilizer of Nations: The Rise and Fall of International
Law 1870–1960. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Krisch N. Beyond Constitutionalism: The Pluralist Structure of Postnational Law.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.
Lagarde P. L e principe de proximité dans le droit international privé contemporain ;
cours général de droit international privé // Recueil des Cours de l’Academie de Droit
International de la Haye. Vol. 196. Leiden, Boston: Martinus Nijhoff; Brill, 1986.
Lepard B.D. Customary International Law: A New Theory with Practical Applications.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
Lewis D. Convention: A Philosophical Study. Oxford: Blackwell, 2002.
Makarov A.N. Völkerrecht und Internationales Privatrecht // Mélanges Streit.
Vol. 1 / Ed. by S. Séfériades, G. Maridakis, P. V allindas. Athens: Imprimerie «Pyrsos
», 1938.
Mälksoo L. Russian Approaches to International Law. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2015.
Manner G. The Object Theory of the Individual in International Law // American
Journal of International Law. 1952. Vol. 46(3).
Mayer P. Droit international privé et Droit international public sous l’agle de la
notion de competence // Revue critique de droit international privé. 1979.
Michaels R. Globalizing Savigny? The State in Savigny’s Private International
Law and the Challenge of Europeanization and Globalization // Duke Law School
Legal Studies Paper No. 74. September 2005.
Michaels R. Post-Critical Private International Law: From Politics to Technique:
A Sketch //
Michaels R., Pauwelyn J. Conflict of Norms or Conflict of Laws?: Different Techniques
in the Fragmentation of Public International Law // Duke Journal of Comparative
& International Law. 2012. Vol. 22.
Mills A. The Confluence of Public and Private International Law: Justice, Pluralism
and Subsidiarity in the International Constitutional Ordering of Private Law.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.
Parlett K. The Individual in the International Legal System: Continuity and
Change in International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.
Posner E.A. The Perils of Global Legalism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
Prost M. The Concept of Unity in International Law. Oxford: Hart Publishing,
Regime Interaction in International Law: Facing Fragmentation / Ed. by
M.A. Young. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015.
Scelle G. Le phénomène juridique du dédoublement fonctionnel // Rechtsfragen
der internationalen Organisation – Festschrift für Hans Wehberg. Frankfurt am
Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1956.
Waters M.A. Creeping Monism: The Judicial Trend Toward Interpretive Incorporation
of Human Rights Treaties // Columbia Law Review. 2007. Vol. 107(3).

Information about authors

Tretyakov S.V. (Moscow) – Candidate of Legal Sciences, Associate Professor
of the Department of Civil Law of the Faculty of Law of the Lomonosov Moscow
State University, Professor of the Department of Private International Law of
the Russian School of Private Law, Chief Researcher of the HSE Institute of Legal
Research (119991, GSP-1, Moscow, Leninskie Gory 1, Bldg. 13-14; e-mail: openstructure@

Mashkova E.V. (Moscow) – Assistant of the Department of International Law
of the Faculty of Law of the Lomonosov Moscow State University (119991, GSP-1,
Moscow, Leninskie Gory 1, Bldg. 13-14; e-mail:

bottom of page