This paper summarizes and assesses the international trend, both in doctrine and in legal provisions dealing with conflict of laws in intellectual property field and reviews the relevant provisions in the Part 5th on applicable law to civil relations evolving foreign elements of the Vietnam’s 2015 Civil Code. The author shows that the two new provisions of the Vietnam’s 2015 Civil Code, namely Article 679 and Article 683, has partly caught up with the international trend in recognizing conflicts of laws and providing choice-of-law rules for resolving these conflicts in the intellectual property relations. The shortcoming of the Vietnam’s 2015 Civil Code is the absence of a particular provision dealing with the conflict of laws in case of infringement of intellectual property rights. On that basis, the paper offers comments and suggestions on the need to make the provisions of the Vietnam’s Civil Code more specific in the future.

Since the political and legal systems are different between mainland China and Taiwan, conflict of laws issues arose in both public and private air transport laws after the launch of direct routes. Three models can be used as solutions to these issues: uniform substantive law, conflict of laws, and agreements by private institutions. The uniform substantive law model is ideal but not feasible; the conflict of laws model is possible but not realistic. The agreements by private institutions model respects private autonomy, which seems to be a supplementary yet feasible option with fragmented and conservative characteristics. Based on the characteristics of each model, the ideal way to solve this issue is to prioritise the model of agreements by carriers at this early stage and, finally, to consider uniform conflict of laws rules or substantive law when the opportunity is mature or the ultimate reunification is realised.

Transnational terrorism in the twenty-first century is a unique threat that has sparked equally unique responses from nations at the receiving end of it, particularly the US. Some of these responses, however, have ignored both provisions of international law and the political realities prevailing in regions of Pakistan where the Drone strikes have been conducted. This poses various policy problems as the US has continuously used legal lacunae in international humanitarian law to carry on its “war on terror.” This paper addresses the problem by proposing a new form of armed conflict known as “transnational armed conflict,” which accounts for the unique nature of a conflict between a State and a non-State actor operating from the territory of another State. It allows for the setting of appropriate impact and assessment thresholds that could effectively bring such countermeasures in compliance with the accepted principles of international humanitarian law.