International private law Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

What is the applicable private law ?

A

Application of private law in transnational relationships is determined by rules of « IPL ».

Basically 2 types of rules of IPL:

  • conflict rules (national or uniform);
  • substantive rules of IPL (mostly uniform rules) (often applied only after the conflict rule)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

conflict rules

A

Starting point: a state will apply the law applicable by virtue of the conflict rule even if foreign law

Unity or diversity of conflict rules ? Often harmonised (Hague Conference, EU), but also often diverse > jurisdiction is important in case different conflict rules lead to a different result.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Structure of conflict rules

A
  • conflict category > connecting factor
  • Classify the issue in a category (such as property, contract, tort, …)
  • Concretisation of the connecting factor refers to the applicable law (e.g. law chosen by the parties, law of nationality, law of residence or seat, location of a thing, place of damage, …)
  • (NB possible renvoi ?)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Exceptions to conflict rules

A

Exceptions to the determination of the applicable law by conflict rules:

A) exception of international public order (art. 21 Rome-I-R)

B) treatment of « overriding mandatory » law (loi d’application immédiate, Eingriffsnormen) (analogous to public law):
- 1° application of domestic overriding rules (always) (art. 9 (II)) (e.g. Belgian Act of July 12, 2015 against vulture funds) Limitative according to ECJ (2016 in Greece/ Nikiforidis; salary cut for teacher working in Germany paid by Greek government: Greek law not as such overriding in Germany) but other provisions may be taken into account as factual elements) Definition & criteria of overriding in Art. 9 I : autonomous EU-concept; interpreted restrictively in C-184/12 Unamar and C-149/18 Agostinho da Silva Martins v Dekra : only if the court hearing the case finds, on the basis of a detailed analysis of the wording, general scheme, objectives and the context in which that provision was adopted, that it is of such importance in the national legal order that it justifies a departure from the law applicable. Some EU rules are also overriding: consumer protection: protection commercial agent C-381/98 Ingmar)
2° application of foreign overriding rules (rare), see art. 9 (III) Rome-I-R.: “Effect may be given to the overriding mandatory provisions of the law of the country where the obligations arising out of the contract have to be or have been performed, in so far as those overriding mandatory provisions render the performance of the contract unlawful” (comp. Art. 16 Hague Convention on Agency)
- (the Rome Convention was more flexible, as are the Hague Agency and Trust Conventions)
- Comp. § 187(2) US restatement 2nd of Conflict of Laws: “fundamental policy of a state which has a materially greater interest than the chosen state in the determination of the particular issue” (comparative impairment doctrine)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Exceptions to conflict rules - Requirement of internationality ?

A

Traditional requirement - more or less in the Rome-I reg

• Under pressure, see e.g.

  • conflict rule for company law
  • ECJ Vinyls case law on voidable transactions
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

conflict rules: company law

A

• Category « company law » (and other legal persons)
• Connection factor: either principal seat or incorporation theory
- Conflict rule sometimes in some of its effects set aside by EU law (free movement), see ECJ judgments in Centros & in Inspire Art
- Tendency towards incorporation theory, but restricting the category (see below)

• Issues within this category are mainly:

  • requirements for incorporation (eg capital requirements)
  • functioning of the company
  • dissolution and liquidation of the company.
  • Tendency to exclude from this category creditor protection rules, and classify them as insolvency rules (thus dependent on lex of the COMI, center of main interest, i.e. real seat). Eg ECJ in Kornhaas. (See topic 11 insolvency)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

conflict rules: procedure

A
  • Category « procedural law »
  • Issues within this category:
  • procedure s.s.
  • evidence ? (in part procedural, in part substantive law)

• Connection factor: lex fori (Forum = court itself)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

conflict rules: property law

A
  • Category « property law » (see also Ch. 12 insolvency regulation)
  • Issues within this category:
  • types of property rights, includes proprietary security rights;
  • mode of acquisition and loss of property,
  • rights included in ownership or other property rights

• Connection factor: lex rei sitae (location)

  • immovables: immovable
  • movables things: possible conflit mobile. E.g. reservation of title in international sale
  • Receivables and other rights to performance: place of debtor or of creditor or lex causae ? Yet unsolved. EU Commission made a proposal.
  • documentary intangibles: lex cartae sitae
  • dematerialised or intermediated securities: see Hague Convention on Securities held with an intermediary (April 1, 2017 in force in USA, Switzerland, Mauritius)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

conflict rules: intellectual property law

A
  • Intellectual property rights are ‘territorial monopolies’ (national or multinational).
  • Recognition is territorial (although many rules of recognition in other countries of IP rights recognised first in another country)
  • Protection is determined by the law of the territory for which protection is sought (lex loci protectionis, art. 8 I Rome-II-Reg) (for jurisdiction, see Ch. 11)
  • Patrimonial aspects (IP as immaterial property) also territorial, but in case of unitary multinational IP rights, only a single property law applies (law where the right is situated, usually residence of the holder, see e.g. the unitary patent in Ch. 7)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

conflict rules: contract

A
  • Worldwide: only Hague « principles » on choice of law in business contracts (approved 19 March 2015)
  • In the EU: Rome Treaty of 1980 replaced since 17 Dec. 2009 by Reg. 593/2008 (« Rome-I ») (except for Denmark & overseas)
  • unless specific Treaties concluded before 17 June 2008 and incl. nonmember states (art. 24 ff)* or specific EU rules (art. 27)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

conflict rules: contract: category

A
  • Category « contractual obligations » in civil & commercial matters (incl. individual labour contracts) (excl. arbitration agreements, trusts, company law, family relations, etc.). Also excluded: jurisdiction agreements (governed by Brussels-Regulation)
  • Issues within this category: art. 10 - 12 (incl. formation, validity, form, interpretation, performance, extinction, prescription, effects of nullity).
  • Not: what constitues money in a certain currency: determined by the law of that currency (lex monetae)
  • Not: precontractual liability (incl. Prospectus liability), see Rome-II.
  • ? Whether tort law applies between contract parties (questions of ‘cumul’). In matters of jurisdiction, this is in EU law qualified as ‘contractual’. Unclear as to applicable law (can one exclude tort claims under a the law of the place of tort that allows a cumul ?) , but art. 4, III Rome-II points in the same direction.
  • But a contract does anyway not protect a supplier against tort claims by third parties (including downstream contract parties) where allowed under foreign law
  • Protection of creditors in case of merger of companies > lex societatis (ECJ in C’493/14, KA finanz)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

conflict rules: contract: mandatory provisions ?

A
  • Overriding mandatory provisions: see supra.
  • Legislator may try to give extraterritorial effect to certain mandatory rules by imposing on domestic players to put certain clauses in their contracts under foreign law.
  • E.g. Art. 55 Bank Recovery Directive: Financial institutions in the EU & EEA must put in their contracts under non EEA-law a ‘bail-in’ clause to give effect to the bail-in powers of the BRRD.
  • E.g. under the GDPR transfer of personal data to a non-EU country with an inadequate level of protection may only take place with safeguards. Such safeguards may in particular result from appropriate contractual clauses. The EU Commission has approved certain model caluses meeting this standard.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

conflict rules: contract Rome-I Reg.

A

• Reg. 593/2008 « Rome-I »
• Connection factor:
- Primary factor: choice of law (art. 3 freedom of choice) in relationship with an international element (otherwise, mandatory rules of the domestic law remain applicable, art. 3,3) (analogous rule for EU mandatory law in 3,4)
- In consumer contracts as defined by art. 6 (see next slide), and individual employment contracts (art. 8), choice only relates to non-mandatory law (NB. Injunction for unfair terms is a matter governed by Rome-II)
- Limited choice in insurance contracts (other than large risks) art. 7

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

conflict rules: consumer contracts in Rome-I Reg.

A

▪ Which consumer contracts (art. 6) ?

  • activities pursued in the state of the consumer
  • activities directed – by any means- to the state of the consumer
  • (with 5 exceptions and without prejudice to separate rules for carriage and insucrance)

▪ Applicable law in these contracts: - law of the habitual residence of the consumer

▪ NB. High level of protection and mandatory application of EU consumer protection raises cost of imported goods and services

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

conflict rules: contract Rome-I Reg.

A
  • Subsidiary connection factor if no choice of law:
  • First, judge must check whether the contract has to characterised as one of the following
  • sales in art. 4 (a) (residence seller)
  • services in art. 4 (b) (residence service provider)
  • immovable property or tenancy in art. 4 (c/d) ,
  • franchising and distribution in art. 4 (e/f) (residence franchisee, distributor)
  • contracts for carriage: art. 5
  • If not (or mixed), the court determines the characteristic performance (art. 4 II): law of the residence of its debtor
  • Escape clause : « closest connection » if manifestly closer than the one indicated above (art. 4 IV)
  • « Residence » defined in art. 19 Rome-I.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

conflict rules: contract – choice of law in Rome-I Reg.

A
  • Law applicable to the choice agreement: in principle the chosen law (‘Baron von Munchhausen clause’) • with a possible role for the law of the establishment (comp. Hague Principles 6 I a and 6 II)
  • Validity to be judged separately (separability)
  • Law of a country or also « rules of law » ? (cfr. debate on lex mercatoria) (see Recital 13 & 14 Rome-I; Hague Principles art. 3)
  • Formation: next slide
  • Express / implied choice Factors in determining whether there is a tacit choice: forum clause; reference to certain legal provisions, etc.
  • Partial choice
  • Problem: no solution for battle of forms with conflicting choice of law clauses … (see Art. 6 I b Hague Principles: knockout; Dutch case law: rule on battle of forms in the otherwise applicable law )
  • Change of choice (yes, but not to detriment of third parties) > Case: APCOA
  • Choice a posteriori (but cannot create a formal invalidity a posteriori by choosing a « lex invaliditatis ») (art. 3 II Rome-I; Hague Principles 2 III)
17
Q

conflict rules: contract – choice of law

A

• Why do parties choose a certain law ?

  • Mainly familiarity (incl. language).
  • Other reasons: perceived quality, perceived predictability (following from clarity and stability), perceived neutrality

• Empirical data:

  • Some attraction of English, Swiss and to some extent French, US and German law (2014 study from ICC arbitrations: 11,2% English, 9,9 % Swiss) (in 2003 still 24 % English, 20 % Swiss, 19 % French))
  • Unpopular Unpopular in Europe: US law and law of islamic countries
  • Battle for the choice of law between common law >< « continental law ». « battle of the brochures » (2007 – 2008)
  • Moreover, ‘boilerplate clauses’ are often copied from other jurisdictions without taking into account the chosen (or otherwise applicable) law (result is an ‘alien contract’)
18
Q

conflict rules: contract Rome-I Reg.

Some more specific categories

A
  • Assignability (& pledgeability) and relation with assigned debtor (art. 14 II): lex causae. There may be overriding mandatory limits (eg Belgian Act of July 12, 2015 against vulture funds). No rule for third-party effects of assignment (Commission Proposal March 2018 in favour of assignor’s habitual residence; differs from Insolvency Reg: COMI of the cessus)
  • Legal subrogation (art. 15: law governing the relationshop between subrogating and subrogatdd party) - Recourse between debtors (art. 16) (but if no contractual relationship between them: art. 19 Rome-II) - For the distinction between and combination of both questions, see ECJ in C-359/14 Ergo Insurance
  • Set-off (art. 17): law of the claim against which the right to set-off is asserted (« passive claim ») (comp. the rule in the Insolvency regulation)
19
Q

conflict rules: contract other instruments

A

• Matters regulated by other IPL instruments:
• Representation (Agency): Hague Convention 1978
- Ch. II: agency contract: choice, subsid. establishment agent
- Ch. III: external relationship: establishment agent
• Trusts: Hague Convention on Trusts • Arbitration agreements: New York Convention 1957 (s. further)
• Jurisdiction Agreements: Brussels-I Regulation / 2005 Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements
• Bills of exchange: uniform laws
• Precontractual liability: Rome-II-R
• Matrimonial property agreements: EU-reg 2016/1103
• Agreements as to succession: EU-reg 650/2012

20
Q

conflict rules: non-contractual Rome-II-Reg.

A
  • In the EU: Regulation 864/2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations, on acts since Jan 11, 2009 (as clarified in C-412/10, Homawoo).
  • Scope of category « torts »; see art. 15
  • disputed: actio pauliana (damages is certainly within 864/2007; effect on the attacked legal act is rather under Rome-I) (as to jurisdiction no tort claim : C-261/90, Reichert-II; accessory to the claim against the fraudulent debtor according to C-337/17 Feniks)
  • Liability of directors in case of insolvency may be governed by the applicable insolvency law (i.e. lex COMI, see Ch. 11)

• Priority (lex specialis …) to:

  • existing conventions including non-member states (e.g. traffic accidents, …),
  • EU leges speciales on conflicts (e.g. e-commerce, combating counterfeiting & piracy)

• Excluded from scope of Reg. 864/2007: privacy and personality rights (no consensus between EU MS; thus:

  • jurisdiction becomes very important (jurisdiction is determined by EU law) (‘libel tourism’)
  • National conflict of law rules apply and will determine whether the applied law has extraterritorial effect; but comitas requires to limit as far as possible extraterritoiral effects

• EU Regulation 864/2007 - Connection factor:

  • art. 4 I : where the damage occurs (neither the causing event, nor the indirect consequences) (but rules of safety and conduct: place of the event, art. 17) (NB for certain acts, locating them is increasingly difficult, esp. in cyberspace)
  • both residing in the same country: 4 II
  • manifestly closer connection: 4 III
  • Specific rules for product liability, unfair competition, environmental damages, infringing intellectual property, industrial action
  • Alternative conflict rule for « direct actions » against insurers: possible if either applicable tort law or applicable insurance contract law allows it (art. 18) (such rule is missing in Rome-I)

Regulation 864/2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations:
•Category unjust enrichment: art. 10
•Negotiorum gestio: art. 11
•Culpa in contrahendo: art. 12
•Common rule: freedom of choice (art. 14)

21
Q

substantive rules of IPL

A

• « Substantive rules of IPL»: separate rules for transnational contractual or other relationships (comp. also substantive law for transnational procedures). Such rules may be purely national or of international origin
• Mostly of international origin (treaties); different methods: model law, treaty including rules, etc.
• Main examples:
- International sales of goods (esp. CISG)
- International transport (eg Maritime transport: Hague rules relating to bills of lading 1924/1968 (still very widespread) > Hamburg rules 1978/1992 (not very succesful: 34 ratifications, but few important nations) > Rotterdam rules 2009 (not yet in force: 3 ratifications, 20 required)

  • Exceptionally, treaties have unified or harmonised also the law for domestic relationships (e.g. bills of exchange; EU law)
  • Mode of application - attention (for illustrations, see international sales):
  • In principle first apply the conflict rule (indirect application) - with exceptions
  • non-uniform law has subsidiary application (lacunae)
  • Sometimes choice between national and international « model » (incl. a socalled optional instrument)
  • Reverse example: chosen law has rules that do apply only to domestic contracts or at least do not apply if the law applies only on the basis of choice without a further ‘sufficient connection’. Eg S. 12 of the UK Late Payment of Commercial Debts Act 1998
  • Supermandatory rules in Belgian law on distribution contracts do not apply extraterritorially (see the question in C-507/15, Agro/Petersime)
22
Q

IPL - lex mercatoria

A
  • Rules of non-national origin, not part of international public law , which would be applicable to international relationships of private law
  • As a « material » source: many such rules play a role because they are « received » within domestic law for international relationships (as substantive rules of IPL); They are then applied on the basis of freedom of contract (if not contradicting mandatory law), custom or usage (for gap filling), as a source for the content of contractual relationships, etc…..; sometimes the state even delegates law making to private standardisation organisations.
  • Formal source ? Maybe as rules of customary law (not yet a system of law)
  • Also as an autonomous system of law ? (a possible choice of law and not merely integration of a rule in a contract) ? Defended by i.a. Clive Schmitthoff and more radically Berthold Goldman. Historically, a truly anational law as an autonomous system has never existed
  • Two questions:
  • « political » question (acceptance by states/enforcement of arbiytral awards ? Or are alternatives to enforcement sufficient (shame & reputation; money in escrow, …)
  • « practical » question (certainty of contract): set of individual awards or an institutionalised system of rules and precedents ?
  • Sources : trade customs, standard terms (e.g. UCP), non-implemented uniform law (?*), general principles and concepts as received in transnational case law (esp. arbitral decisions)
    • Eg choice by parties of a convention which is as such not applicable (HR 26 May 1989 on CMR)
    • in other cases understood as expressing custom
  • Attempts at codification:
  • Unidroit PICC 1994-2016. Its «format »: a restatement of the law.
  • But becomes concrete only in sectoral practices and institutions (global supply chains, specific markets, …)
  • Content remains mostly interdependent with state law and merchants rely to a large extent on state law next to non-state law. Moreover, always complemented by state constitutional law and state regulation (or regulation by international organisations s.s.)
  • Accepted in the practice of international commercial arbitration in the sense that they refer to non-state law also. But: rather than a single national law, there are many functionally differentiated transantional subsystems creating law ‘beyond the state’ (R. Michaels: in commercial law differentiation between sectors has become important than between states) - See e.g. also hybrid institutions as state-organsied arbitration courts, standard-setting, etc…