Florida Choice of Law Rules

As a general rule, Florida courts apply the substantive law of the jurisdiction with the most significant relationship to the dispute, often determined under the “significant relationships” test  when it comes to tort claims. See Bishop v. Fla. Specialty Paint Co., 389 So. 2d 999, 1001 (Fla. 1980). In regard to contract claims, Florida has long adhered to the rule of lex loci contractus, which provides that the law of the jurisdiction where the contract was executed governs the substantive rights and liabilities under the contract. Substantive law includes rules that define the parties’ rights and obligations—such as standards of liability, available damages, and defenses.

By contrast, procedural matters are governed by Florida law whenever the case is litigated in Florida, regardless of which state’s substantive law applies. Procedural rules include matters such as pleading standards, discovery, admissibility of evidence, burdens of proof, and trial practice. 

However, the Florida Supreme Court has held that in regard to statute of limitations, the choice of law question must be treated the same as substantive law, and will be governed by the “significant relationship” test, rather than automatically applying Florida’s procedural rules. See Merkle v. Robinson, 737 So. 2d 540 (Fla. 1999).

This substantive-procedural distinction is critical, as it can significantly affect litigation strategy, available remedies, and case outcomes. Understanding how Florida courts navigate these choice-of-law issues is essential when litigating multi-state or cross-border disputes