introduction: concept, three processes, renvoi &vorfrage, forum shopping and forum non conveniens

Question 1

ipr

Answer 1

vaak ook conflicts of law maar dat verwijst louter naar stap 2 erwijl ipr streeft naar legal certainty takes precedence over suitability. is ook rustig type niet enkel in conflict

Question 2

three distinct processes- -which have led to varying degrees of convergence or harmonisation..

Answer 2

1) jurisdiction (what court had jurisdiction to hear the case)
2) applicable law (what law will that court apply)
3) recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments.

Question 3

narrow definition of ipr/conflict of law

Answer 3

the rules applied by domstic courts to determine which laws apply to cases that involve people in diffrent countries or diffrent nationalities, or transactions which cross international boundaries.

Question 4

broader approach IPR

Answer 4

includes recognition and enforcement– what are the rules and needs if any for restricting the authority of domestic courts to hear disputes involving foreigners and foreign transactions, and is there/should there be a binding obligation to recognise and enfoce judgments resulting from adjudication in foreign courts.

Question 5

pas op!!! all three areas , been an increasing international CONVERGENCE or even harmonisation with the EU as the most advanced!

Answer 5

maar!! IPR conceptually neitehr seeks nor requires regulatory convergence! – remains NATIONAL law!! with the potential and evolving exception of a growing number of subject-matter in Europeaen law

Question 6

ondanks (notwithstanding) convergence and harmonisation , IPR remains dramatically diffrent from PUBLIC international law in two main aspects

Answer 6

1) it aims to regulate relationships between private parties NOT states
2) it is designed to function primarily at the domestic level in domestic courts

there is limited overlap in particular in sovereign and diplomatic immunity and government seizure of poperty (niet in het Handboek )

Question 7

sources of PIL

Answer 7

belangrijk ! hague conference van 1893- important source for PIl – active in three areas: 1)protection of children, family and property relations 2) international legal cooperation and litigation 3) international commerce and finance law (including potential future convention on choice of law for contracts ) in total 39 conventions! met 72 member states

Question 8

UNCITRAL

Answer 8

works mostly through model laws on international commercial arbitartion and contract for international sale of goods

UNCITRAL is concerned with harmonisation of substantive law thus falling outside the traditional scope of PIL

Question 9

hague conference 1893

Answer 9

On the initiative of Tobias Asser, the First Diplomatic Session of the HCCH was convoked in 1893. Its aim was, and remains, to “work for the progressive unification of the rules of private international law”, including by creating, and assisting in the implementation of, multilateral conventions that promote the harmonisation of the rules and principles of private international law (or conflict of laws).

The First to Fourth Diplomatic Session of the HCCH took place in 1893, 1894, 1900 and 1904 respectively. They resulted in a number of multilateral treaties, the Hague Conventions, that unified the rules of private international law in the areas of Marriage (1902), Divorce (1902), Guardianship (1902), Civil Procedure (1905), Effects of Marriage (1905), and Deprivation of Civil Rights (1905).

Since 1955, the HCCH developed 38 international conventions and protocols that establish rules on jurisdiction, applicable law, the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments, and on legal and judicial cooperation.[4] They are open for adoption, accession or ratification by any State, including States that are not members of HCCH.

In 2015, the HCCH adopted its first soft-law instrument, the Hague Principles on the Choice of Law in International Commercial Contracts.

The HCCH’s instruments cover subject matters in the area of 1)family law and child protection, 2)international civil procedure and legal cooperation, as well as 3) cross-border commercial and finance law. These areas are often referred to as the “three pillars” of the HCCH. The following HCCH conventions are the most ratified:

Question 10

UNCITRAL

Answer 10

United Nation Comission on international Trade law

In an increasingly economically interdependent world, the importance of an improved legal framework for the facilitation of international trade and investment is widely acknowledged. The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), established by the United Nations General Assembly by resolution 2205 (XXI) of 17 December 1966 (see annex I), plays an important role in developing that framework in pursuance of its mandate to further the progressive harmonization and modernization of the law of international trade by preparing and promoting the use and adoption of legislative and non-legislative instruments in a number of key areas of commercial law.

Question 11

three processes of PIL and standard ‘connecting factors’

Answer 11

1) determination of JURISDICTION/FORUM
2) APPLICABLE LAW/ LEX CAUSAE
3) RECOGN. and ENFORCEMENT

belangrijk voor stap 2 voornamelijk 19/20ste eeuw : Friederich Carl Von Savigny

maar meer en meer relevance for jurisdiction belangrijk voor versch zaken : bv parties willen 1 court mss liever dan ander voor politieke kleur! maar ook voor de predictably van de outcomes!

Question 12

procedural issues – excluded from PIL

Answer 12

Choice of law/PIL never applies to this issues!! – depends always on the law of the country wherre the proceeding is succesfully brought = lex fori

discussie wat is procedural en wat niet

Recovery of costs and possibility of legal aid are unidsputed examples of procedural issues. nog voobeeld is bv: welke partie uiteindelijk fees moet dragen, obtaining evidence, of trial must by heard by jury , ius novit curiae etc. = procedural dus niet IPR

Question 13

3 luiken ! pil

Answer 13

1) internationale bevoegdheid (bevpegdheidsrecht)
2) toepasselijk recht (conflictenrecht)
3) erkenning en uitvoerbaarheid buitenlandse onnissen en aktes (exequaturrecht)

cassusen stap voor stap toepassen !

IPR regelt recht van toepassing op privaatrechtelijke relaties= twee prive personenen of prive persoon en OH als deze handelt privaatrechtelijk = IURE COMERCII

MAAR IPR geen internationaal recht is meer een BRuggenbouwer tss veschillende rechtssystemen

Bijzondere positie van het VK, Ierland en vooral Denemarken  zijn de buitenbeentjes, hiermee altijd oppassen bij casussen!

Question 14

lex fori

Answer 14

recht van de rechtbank - procedural issues

Question 15

ius novit curia

Answer 15

the bench is supposed to know this itself

Question 16

application of law

Answer 16

even when applicable law is determined, not all judges will apply it in the same way – vooral waar OPEN-ENDED (ex. general welbeing) + CULTURAL context

+ diffrences in competence and know-how

GLEICHLAUF: the circumstance in which the court with jurisdiction (the forum) applies his “own” law to the dispute may often seem attractive – soms in commercial kan zelfs andersom dat ze willen dat engels recht wordt toegepast door een niet-engelse court– omdat die het anders zou inetrpreteren

reden waarom niet voor bepaalde court: Bias, incompetence, corruption

Question 17

gleichlauf

Answer 17

GLEICHLAUF: the circumstance in which the court with jurisdiction (the forum) applies his “own” law to the dispute may often seem attractive – soms in commercial kan zelfs andersom dat ze willen dat engels recht wordt toegepast door een niet-engelse court– omdat die het anders zou inetrpreteren

rechtsmacht en toepasselijk recht lopen samen

Question 18

Carl Friederich van Savigny (1779-1861)

Answer 18

boek geschreven over Roman international law– laatste deel covered a BLINDFOLD approach to PIL

the rules of PIL identify applicable law without taking account of the contents of that law or any other

Carl rejects both the personal focus- roman empire of tribal law and the territorial focus of early middle ages

von savigny focusis on the SITZ /seat of a relationship in law –

wich legal order has the closest CONNECTION to the specific facts at issue, where lies the nexus of the case

in von savigny approach conflict of laws ought to become neutral

maar zijn th toch dominant nu in PIl voora in stage van applcale law (step 2) = 3 onderdelen

Question 19

step 2 applicalbe lew lex causae = 3 stappen

Answer 19

1) characterisation (french: qualification) of legal question: requires the facts be accommodated within one or more legal categories to which a choice of law may be applied– crucial step (harmonised or not, national courts have full discretion or not)
2) connecting factor: each legal category has than a connecting factor (EU law calls it linking factor) Whcih legal system connects most closely with this category of legal questions??
3) lex causae: apply substantive law
bv. capacity to marry = qualification of a belgian (= connecting factor) is determined by belgian law = applicalble law

standard factors are divided in two categories! 1)personal 2)causal

Question 20

connecting factors

Answer 20

1) personal bv. domicile, recidence, nationality

2) causal: lex domicilli, lex contractus, lex delicti, lex loci delicti commissi, lex damni etc.

Question 21

stap 1 van stap 2 applicable law = characterisation of legal question

Answer 21

requires the fact to be accommodated within one or more legal categories– this categories are branches of private law bv : capacity to matty, marital property law, dependece, succession, torts, contracts, = direct result of Savigny’s influence: one employs an objective approach in search of the sitz of the facts = wich legal order has the closest connection to specific facts f teh issue = sitz

verschil met US theory of governmental intrest analysis= which holds that the stae with the greatest intrest in having its law applied to a given case should see it applied.

Question 22

US theory of governmental intrest analysis

Answer 22

which holds that the stae with the greatest intrest in having its law applied to a given case should see it applied.– verschil von savigny theory

Question 23

european private law sitz?

Answer 23

for correction of the objective sitz theory to have the law apply with the CLOSEST and MOST REAL connection

Question 24

subcategory of characterisation is INCIDENTAL issue/VORFRAGE

Answer 24

wanneerbeslist welke characterisation, welk applicable law is most connected to the legal category however before one may apply it – need to decide on the actual existence of the category in the facts at the issue! = Vorfrage = Rechtsvraag die incidenteel rijst naast de hoofdvraag, het materieelrechtelijke antwoord op deze rechtsvraag determinieert en tot een andere verwijzingscategorie behoort dan de

• Zelfstandige aanknopingstechniek: De incidentele vraag wordt behandeld alsof ze de hoofdvraag is en het IPR van het forum stipt de toepasselijke wet aan. (Vorfrage als hoofdvraag oplossen naar IPR van het forum)
• Onzelfstandige aanknoping= waarbij het IPR van de materiele wet, die voor het oplossen van de hoofdvraag van toepassing is, op de voorvraag wordt toegepast. (Vorfrage na hoofdvraag oplossen volgens IPR van materieel recht dat werd aangewezen door het forum bij oplossing hoofdvraag)

twee cases: Ogden v Ogden + Schwebel v. Ungar

1) Ogden v Ogden : court of appeal england+wales had to determin wheter the marriage, celbrated in england between english and french national was valid evne no parental consent was given. court of appeal held that this was a matter of formal validity of marriage = characterisation wich lead to the lex locus celebrationis! dus applicalbe law is english law – this made consent nor relevant maar als ze oordelen is capacity to marry was applicable law the capaicity of marriage= nationality of person = french law en daar kan dan niet! dan aws marriage invalid!
2) schwebel v ungar: canadian supreme court jewish husband and wife married and domiciled in hungary en route to relocta to israel they stay in italy where the husband divorces his wife by “get” neither hungarian or italy recognices “get” maar israel their subseuent domicile of choice does! wife moves to canad but remains docilied in israel went to a 2 marriage – husband zegt nullity of marriage on basis of bigamy

main question is capacity of of marrying of the wife a characterisation that under candian law calls for the application of lex domicilli = israel = incidental question however relates to the validity of divorce which under canadian law leads to lex domicilli of taht time = hungarian law or italian law – supreme court nevertless applies israeli law– law of main question

maar super weinig vorfrage cases! – ehrenzweig famous referring to vorfrage as another miscreant of a conceptualism gone rampant!

maar in european law kan wel belangrijk zijn – zien we dat ze dat gebruiken om te oordelen of idd court wel bevoegd is – is zelfs deesl gecodificeerd bv artikel 10(1) rome I regulation on applicable law in contracts – zegt existence and validity of contract shall be determined by law wwhich would govern it under this regulation= CANCELS out lex fori to decide the vorfrage!!

Question 25

renvoi

Answer 25

relates to the question whether a reference, by application of conflict of laws rules, to the law of state X includes a reference to all laws of that state including other words state X’own private international rules – two types of renvoi

1) renvoi= remission (trgverwijzing, ehrverwijzing)= referral to the lex fori
2) renvoi au second degré = transmission = verderverwijzing

renvoi plays also a role in preventing forum shopping!

arguments against renvoi= meest!! in case of renvoi, the lex fori refers to the lex causae whose private international rules re-refer to the lex fori! whose private rules re refer to elx causae! = carousel

gevolg= many treaties exclude renvoi! eu law doe stoo as a more or less general rule! for reasons of legal certainty!

Question 26

forum shopping and forum non conveniens

Answer 26

forum shopping = technique whereby a litigant selects his forum to sue, on basis of suitability. – kan abusive nature! bv als puur keist voor the qualities of a forum bv. selected for the time they take to decide a case= technique= TORPEDO + in combination with the impossibility for the party to sue elsewhere

doctrine forum non conveniens

Question 27

doctrine forum non conveniens – english law

Answer 27

a national court may decline to exercise jurisdiction( doctrine kan ook rol spelen in enforcement stage) on the ground that a court in another state, which has also jurisdiction would objectively be more appropriate forum for the trial of the action – more suitable for the intrests of all the parties

Question 28

forum shopping ook voor stap 2 choice of applicable law

Answer 28

kunnen kiezen voor one law to apply to their legal relationshi rather than another, for reasons of the chosen law giving the parties possibilities which the other law does not have. bv twee parties is zelfde state kiezen toch voor ene andere jurisdiction omdat deze andere vormen heeft bv trusts is unknown in civil jurisdictions

forum shopping is iets geheel anders in common law! bv arrest : MARTRADE SHIPPING

popplewell J – forum non conveniens – criterion of SIGNIFICANT CONNECTION mus connect the substantive transaction itself to England – provide a real connection between the contract and the effect of prompt payment of debts on the economic lif in UK (comment on Martrade shipping) such factors may include:

1) place of performance of oligations under the ocntract is in england
2) nationalities of the parties or one of them is english
3) when the parties are carrying relevant part of their business in england
4) economic conqesuences of a delay in payment of debts may be felt in UK

MAAR in casu a mere Londen arbitration of English jurisdiction clause CANNOT be a relevant connecting factor!

england is zeer attractive in international commercial arbitration – litigation

nog vb van forum shopping in voornamelijk stap 3 is YOKOS v TOMSNEFT in irish high court – when should a court apply the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards= new york convention

deze conventie looks mercifully on forum shopping

no tomskneft assets in ireland nor corporate domicile

new york convention has a PRO-ENFORCEMENT BIAS

Question 29

impact of European law on the Private International Law of MS

Answer 29

legal basis for european international las has evoveld! (historie van legal basis voor european IPL)=

1) treaty establishing european economic area art 220- 1957:MS moeten met elkaar in negociations gaan tosecuring benefits of national door bv simplification of formalities governing the reciprocal recognition and enforcement of judgment and arbitration awards
1993: maasticht treaty: title= provisions and cooperation in the fields of justice and home affairs - voorbereiding op monetaire unie– invoeren van elementen van burgerschap etc onder andere ook alles voor movement of eprsons: judicial cooperation in civil matters; judicial cooperation in criminal matters
1999: treaty of amsterdam: matters in field of judicial cooperation in civil matters having cross border implications : impoving and simplifying system of cross border service and extrajudicial doc. + recog. and enforcement of decisions in civil and commercial cases for proper functioning of internal market.

+ regel dat only courts/tribunals against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law, could petition court of justice ith preliminary ruling dissapeared in entry into force of LISBON treaty! ied mag !

artikel 67 van vWEU nu na lisbon treaty: union facilitate access to justice in particular through principle of MUTUAL RECOGNITION of judicial and extrajudicial decisions in civil matters

conclusie!! had changed dramatically from mere and superfluous reference to the possibility for MS to conclude treaties in PIL area has grown to a standard competence subject only to the general limits to EU heads including subsidiarity and proportionality

cornerstones for jurisdictional regime of EU = PREDICTABILITY– drm wil eu altijd meer en meer in zetten op slechts 1 fora van toeps niet meerdere – vooral harmoniseren waar zwakke partijen een rol spelen ! bv consuemrs

zien in die evolutie dat de EU commissie zijn focus voornamelijk ligt in het alsmaar verder harmoniseren op dot vlak voor meer predictability zien we bv in art. 10 Rome I cancels lex fori out to decide the vorfrage! maar ook rome II applicable lw to non contractueal obligations! art. 15 maar 1 groot probleem aan deze focus is dat men ook niet kijkt naar the benefits of regulatory benefits! LS reageren helemaal anders en met trial and error kunnen ze naar beste oplossing komen en gebeurt niet met harmonisatie

BREEKPUNT in deze focus van commissie was = KEERPUNT = The Tampere European COuncil turningpoint in european commission’s appraoch to PIL! was a speacial meeting in Tampere in 1999 on the creation of an area of freeodm, security and justice in EU- gave the commission especially a mandate to put forward proposals in areas of NATIONAL law wich until tahn had been the exclusive domaine of MS :

1) better access to justice in EUurope (min procedural rules, common min standars for documents)
2) mutual recognition of judicial decisions - facilitate cooperation
3) greater convergence in civil law!

zien we ook in hague programme van 2005 : mutual recognition of decisions in civil and commercial matters is of the UTMOST importance

2010 european council STOCKHOLME programme continues this path = proces of harmonising conflicts of law in EU level must continue like seperation and dovorces also insurance contracts and security intrests

vragen nu meer en meer codificatie!

Question 30

geschiedenis IPR

Answer 30

Verdrag van Amsterdam in 1999 is het IPR en het Europees
procesrecht in hoog tempo „geëuropeaniseerd door de invoering van inmiddels meer dan tien
verordeningen, maar ook door het Hof van Justitie die nationale IPR-regelingen toetst op hun
verenigbaarheid met het Gemeenschapsrecht

klassieke Savigniaanse conflictenrechtelijke systeem: Halverwege de negentiende eeuw brak Von Savigny met de vanaf de twaalfde eeuw, aanvankelijk in
Italië, ontwikkelde statutenleer, op grond waarvan aan de hand van de categorisering van de
nationale wetten de internationale reikwijdte daarvan werd bepaald

hij bekritiseerde de unilaterale methode waarbij statelijk belang en soevereiniteit het uitgangspunt is, en ontwikkelde een
multilaterale verwijzingsleer/ bij hem staat de rechtsverhouding centraal In een internationaal geval dient de rechtsverhouding te worden „thuisgebracht‟ bij het
rechtsstelse, het op grond van objectieve, feitelijk geografische criteria, het nauwst
verbonden is; werd al opgemerkt dat in deze klassieke methode weinig plaats lijkt voor
opgelegde bescherming.; Het doel van het conflictenrecht is immers in beginsel beperkt tot het
aanwijzen van het geografisch nauw verbonden recht, zonder dat naar belangen van partijen, van
derden of naar het algemeen belang wordt gekeken

In 1968 werd met het EEX-Verdrag57 de eerste Europese regeling op het gebied van het
internationaal procesrecht geïntroduceerd. Meer dan een decennium later, in 1980, werd in de
vorm van het EVO58 ook op het gebied van het conflictenrecht succes geboekt. Hoewel er dus al
enkele vruchten waren geplukt van de Europese samenwerking, nam het Europese IPR pas een
grote vlucht na de inwerkingtreding van het Verdrag van Amsterdam in 1999

De Europese IPR-verordeningen zijn rechtstreeks
toepasselijk in alle EU-lidstaten, met uitzondering van Groot-Brittannië, Ierland en Denemarken,
die ten tijde van de sluiting van het Verdrag van Amsterdam een uitzonderingspositie hebben
bedongen

De eerste twee lidstaten kunnen per verordening bepalen of zij deze aanvaarden,
hetgeen zij tot op heden steeds hebben gedaan. Denemarken is in beginsel niet gebonden aan
verordeningen die op deze basis worden vastgesteld