The concept of rule of recognition is a separate postulate from the concept of national law. In order for a secondary rule to be recognized by the state, the legal profession must first accept it. This can be done by studying primary rules invoked by the legal profession. But even if the legal profession accepts the secondary rule, it does not necessarily follow that it is appropriate. It is best to avoid making this assumption until you have studied the primary rules in detail.

National law is the legal rule that guides judicial decisions. The courts and legal profession practice national law in disputes between states and foreign nations. Disputes between these two systems may involve international and national agreements. Whether the two systems have overlapping jurisdiction is debatable, but for the most part, national law will always be the most appropriate one. For example, a foreign country can impose a more restrictive set of laws on another country than the one that resides in its own territory. Moreover, international agreements often provide more favorable conditions to the foreign party than their national counterparts.

The doctrine of party autonomy is a key precept to apply in international arbitration. International law can supersede national law where there is a conflict between the law of a state and a fundamental international norm. This principle holds true for both territorialized tribunals and international arbitral bodies. Moreover, tribunals are required to consider fundamental international norms when construing national laws. For example, a country’s international public policy may require that the arbitral tribunal construe national law in light of the relevant international law.