現行通例以當事人意思自主原則為主，以最重要關連理論為輔之信託準據法選法模式，自形式上、表象上而言，似無不妥，惟如何決定「最重要」牽連之法律，毋寧始為重心。本文以為，所謂與信託關係有最密切牽連之法律，即為最足以彰顯委託人合法意願之法律；簡言之，信托關係，應以最符合信託本旨在法律為準據法。 本文第二部分首先說明信信託法律衝突發生之原因，亦即涉外信託之意涵，並闡述涉外信託之法律適用程序；第三部分嘗試藉由實例歸納信託制度之共同價值；第四部分則以「美國國際私法第二整編」信託章及海牙國際私法會議於一九八五年所通過之「信託準據法及承認公約」為例，簡析涉外信託選法規範；最後於第五部分提出扭見「以信託之共同價值為根本之選法模式」。

　　　　　The general principle of express trust conflicts law follows the doctrine of party autonomy, i.e., a trust is governed by the law chosen by the settler. Yet, where no applicable law has been chosen, both the (U.S.) Second Restatement of Conflict of laws and the Hague Trusts Convention adopted the so-called "the most significant relationship (the most closely connected) test". The author of this article is of the opinion that any attempt to resolve conflicts problems by means of a set of fixed rules that fail to take into account the substantive tenor of a specific legal pattern is bound to disappoint. Furthermore, the most important influencing consideration to trusts, internal or foreign, is the justified expectation of the settler, which obviously being the prevailing value of express trusts. It is along this line of thought that the "Prevailing Value Based Approach" to trusts conflicts law is for now proposed for the purpose of individual justice as well as certainty/predictability, both being the goals of Conflict of Laws.