СERTA IN ISSUES RELATED TO THE APPLICATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF AUTONOMY OF WILLIN FOR EIGNECONOMIC AGREEMENTS (CONTRACTS)

This article considers certain issues related to the application of the principle of autonomy of will in foreign economic agreements (contracts). Special attention was drawn to the terms, which are mandatory for the counterparties of a foreign economic agreement when applying this principle. A foreign element must be present in the relationship regulated by the contract. Participants in legal relations may independently choose the law to be applied only in cases provided for by law. The choice of law must be obvious or directly follow from the actions of the parties, the terms of the deal or the circumstances of the case unless otherwise provided by law.It is concluded that there is no time limit to make the autonomy of the will, because the choice of law can be made by the participants in legal relations at any time. A distinction has been made between absolute autonomy of will, which means that the parties can determine any legal order at their discretion and limited autonomy of will, which means that the partiescan choose the legal order relating to the country of the parties.The problem of the conclusive form of expression of autonomy of will in acontract was given detailed consideration, as the case is complicated when the applicable law is not clearly defined. The author defined the difficulties arising when the counterparties of the foreign economic agreement (contract) choose the law of a ‘third' (neutral) state. In this case it can be difficult for the counterparties to take into account all the consequences of a foreign economic agreement caused by insufficient knowledge of foreign legislation. The author's opinion is expressed about the falsity of contractual practice, when the parties choose the law of the state, the law not related to the country of the parties. Proposals regarding the legislative regulation of the procedure undertaken by the court to clarify the content of this foreign law were made. The absence of this procedure leadto an ambiguous judicial practice, when any courts «avoid» the application of a law other than the law of Ukraine.