Concept and types of property rights in private international law

The article is devoted to a comprehensive analysis of the concept and types of property rights in private international law (PIL), focusing on the peculiarities of their regulation in the context of cross-border relations. Contemporary challenges, such as digital assets, complicate the application of traditional approaches to regulating property rights. The study explores the legal nature of property rights, their classification by objects (immovable property, movable property, intellectual property, and digital assets), and the conflict-of-law rules determining the applicable law. Particular attention is given to traditional principles, such as lex rei sitae for immovable property, lex loci actus and lex domicilii for movable property, and lex loci protectionis for intellectual property. The article separately analyzes modern challenges, particularly the regulation of digital assets (cryptocurrencies, NFTs), which lack a clear territorial connection, complicating the application of traditional conflict-of-law rules. The article examines the specifics of Ukrainian legislation, particularly the Law of Ukraine “On Private International Law” (Articles 65–66), and its inadequacy in addressing contemporary realities, such as the protection of property during wartime or the regulation of virtual assets. Issues related to the recognition of foreign judicial decisions, harmonization with EU regulations (Rome I and Brussels I bis Regulations), and insufficient adaptation to digital technologies create gaps in legal practice. Recommendations are proposed to improve legal regulation in Ukraine, including amendments to legislation to clarify the status of digital assets, unification of conflict-of-law rules, strengthening mechanisms for recognizing foreign decisions, and introducing judicial guidelines based on the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). The necessity of harmonizing Ukrainian legislation with European standards to ensure legal certainty and investment attractiveness is emphasized. It is noted that the wartime situation in Ukraine complicates the application of lex rei sitae to property in temporarily occupied territories, necessitating exceptions based on international humanitarian law and ECHR practice. The conclusions highlight the importance of adapting PIL to new challenges, such as globalization, the digital economy, and armed conflicts, to ensure effective protection of property rights in cross-border relations.