Research Handbook on EU Private International Law

Research Handbook on EU Private International Law

Research Handbooks in European Law series

Edited by Peter Stone and Youseph Farah

The harmonisation of private international law in Europe has advanced rapidly since the entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam. Most aspects of private international law are now governed or at least affected by EU legislation, and there is a substantial and growing body of case-law from the European Court as well as the courts of the Member States. This timely Handbook addresses key questions and problems that currently exist in the rules of private international law laid down by European Union regulations.

Chapter 9: The interaction between Rome I and mandatory EU private rules – EPIL and EPL: communicating vessels?

Xandra E. Kramer

Subjects: law - academic, european law, private international law

Extract

The Rome I Regulation on the applicable law to contractual obligations co-exists with a still expanding body of EU rules on various aspects of contract law. A specific question that has been raised during the negotiations on the Rome I Regulation is how this instrument relates to substantive EU consumer law in view of the desired coherence of consumer protection. Pursuant to Article 27(1)(b) Rome I this issue should be explicitly addressed in the evaluating report that was due mid-2013 but as to date has not been released. This chapter will not be confined to consumer law, but will take a more general approach to the interaction between Rome I and (substantive) mandatory EU rules in the field of private law. The question is in how far European private international law (EPIL), in particular Rome I, and European private law (EPL) are communicating vessels. The well-known and often commented upon Ingmar ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union (hereafter the European Court), rendered in 2000, for the first time revealed the tension between private international law and substantive EPL. In relation to an agency contract between a Californian principal and an English agent, the European Court ruled that the parties’ choice of Californian law (valid under English private international law) could not evade mandatory provisions of the Agency Directive. This seems to be a clear triumph of mandatory EPL.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information