Abstract As the world becomes increasingly interconnected, many people are faced with increasing challenges in the planning and execution of wealth-transfer strategies upon death when they have property in different countries. At the same time, the rising popularity of succession substitutes or, as they are called in the common law world, will substitutes or non-probate devices that transfer property at death otherwise than by succession, is increasingly posing challenges for cross-border legal disputes, particularly in the absence of uniform choice of law rules relating to succession substitutes. In this article, Professor Jeffrey Talpis reviews the existing approaches for managing and preventing cross-border disputes involving, for example, the use by parties in civil law jurisdictions of common law non-probate devices, such as acquisitions in joint tenancy, pay-on-death or transfer-on-death accounts, and revocable inter vivos trusts. The author first defines and classifies succession substitutes used in domestic laws, then examines different approaches for managing cross-border disputes involving these devices in civil law and common law jurisdictions. While the author continues to promote the adoption of an international instrument to provide uniform solutions to resolve cross-border disputes arising from the use of succession substitutes, he proposes certain suggestions that, in the interim, could assist prevention of such conflicts of law.