Current Gaps and Future Perspectives On
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT C: CITIZEN’S RIGHTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS LEGAL AFFAIRS A European Framework for private international law: current gaps and future perspectives STUDY Abstract This report identifies the gaps that exist in the current European framework of private international law and suggests a road map towards a more comprehensive codification of EU private international law. For the time being, legislative efforts should be directed at creating separate instruments for well-defined problems of private international law. The fruits of these efforts could in the long-term be combined in a code of EU private international law. PE 462.487 EN This document was requested by the European Parliament’s Committee on Legal Affairs AUTHORS Prof. Dr. Xandra Kramer (scientific director) Mr Michiel de Rooij, LL.M. (project leader) Dr. Vesna Lazić Dr. Richard Blauwhoff Ms Lisette Frohn, LL.M. RESPONSIBLE ADMINISTRATOR Ms Vesna Naglič Policy Department C – Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs European Parliament B – 1047 Brussels E-mail: [email protected] LINGUISTIC VERSION Original: EN Translation: DE/FR ABOUT THE EDITOR To contact the Policy Department or to subscribe to its newsletter please write to: poldep- [email protected] European Parliament, manuscript completed in November 2012 © European Union, 2012 This document is available on the Internet at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/studies DISCLAIMER The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorized, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice and sent a copy. 2 A European Framework for private international law: current gaps and future perspectives ________________________________________________________________________________________ CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7 INTRODUCTION 12 PART I: CURRENT GAPS AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVES 15 1. THE EXISTING GAPS IN THE EUROPEAN FRAMEWORK OF PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW 17 1.1. The contents of the current framework 17 1.2. The legislative framework in force 17 1.2.1. Regulations 17 1.2.2. Regulations expected in the near future 19 1.2.3. EU-Regulations and specific Hague Conventions 19 1.2.4. Directives 20 1.2.5. Other relevant EU legislation 20 1.3. Exceptions to the scope of the EU Regulations 21 1.3.1. Brussels I Regulation (No. 44/2001) 21 1.3.2. Regulation Brussels II-bis (No. 2201/2003) 25 1.3.3. Regulation Rome I (No. 593/2008) 28 1.3.4. Regulation Rome II (No. 864/2007) 31 1.3.5. Maintenance Regulation (No. 4/2009) 32 1.3.6. Regulation Rome III (No. 1259/2010) 33 1.3.7. The Insolvency Regulation (No. 1346/2000) 34 1.3.8. European Enforcement Order Regulation (No. 805/2004) 36 1.3.9. European Payment Order Regulation (No. 1896/2006) 36 1.3.10. European Small Claims Procedure Regulation (No. 861/2007) 37 1.3.11. The Succession Regulation 38 1.4. Exception to the scope of relevant Hague Conventions 39 1.5. Citizenship of the Union 39 1.5.1. ECJ case law relevant for (cross) border private law issues 39 1.5.2. Other areas of European private international law connected to Union citizenship 43 1.6. The systematic structure of private international law 46 1.6.1. The traditional analysis of private international law 46 1.7. Gaps that exist within the framework 48 1.7.1. Gaps identified on the basis of the scope of the current framework 48 1.7.2. Gaps identified on the basis of the systematic structure of private international law 49 1.7.3. Concluding remarks with respect to the gaps 51 3 Policy Department C – Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs ________________________________________________________________________________________ 2. ADDITIONS THAT ARE NEEDED TO THE CURRENT FRAMEWORK, NOW AND IN THE FUTURE 53 2.1. Additions required in view of the genuine European area of justice 53 2.1.1. Articles 67 and 81, TFEU 53 2.1.2. The Tampere 1999, The Hague 2004 and Stockholm 2009 programmes 54 2.2. Private international law on the national level 55 2.2.1. PIL is also a phenomenon of national law 55 2.2.2. The situation in the Member States 55 2.3. A brief comparison of three recent codifications: Belgium, the Netherlands and Poland 58 2.3.1. The Belgian Code of Private International Law 2004 58 2.3.2. Book 10 Dutch Civil Code 59 2.3.3. The Polish Act of February 4, 2011 on Private International law 60 2.3.4. The subject matter in more detail 61 2.3.5. The rationale behind the national codification 63 2.4. Developments in internal substantive law that influence PIL 64 2.5. Gaps in the European framework and the contents of national PIL law 65 2.5.1. Comparison between the framework and the national codifications 65 2.5.2. Developments in internal law not identified in the framework 66 2.6. The gaps that can be identified 66 2.6.1. The territorial scope of the rule 66 2.6.2. Systematic gaps 67 2.6.3. Deliberate gaps 67 2.6.4. Notions open to interpretation found in the framework 68 2.7. Additions to the framework 69 3. THE ROLE OF THE EU LEGISLATURE 70 3.1. The options that are in general open to the EU legislature in respect of PIL 70 3.1.1. The legal basis of EU legislation on PIL 70 3.1.2. EU PIL legislation as a replacement of national PIL 70 3.1.3. EU PIL legislation and the relation to international PIL instruments 71 3.1.4. Further legislation by specialised instruments or restructuring through codification 71 3.1.5. The impact of harmonisation or unification of substantive law by the EU 72 3.2. Expansion of the existing EU legislation 73 3.2.1. Pressing issues in the additions identified 73 3.2.2. A code on private international law as a novel option 73 PART II: EXTENDING THE FRAMEWORK TO A CODE 74 4. CONTRIBUTIONS AND ADVANTAGES FOR THE STAKEHOLDERS 74 4.1. Which stakeholders can be identified? 74 4 A European Framework for private international law: current gaps and future perspectives ________________________________________________________________________________________ 4.2. Contributions and advantages that can be identified 77 4.2.1. Facilitation of cross-border transactions, reduction of costs, acceleration of legal proceedings 77 4.2.2. Other contributions and advantages 77 5. THE CONTRIBUTIONS AND ADVANTAGES OF A COMPREHENSIVE CODIFICATION (A CODE) 79 5.1. The difference between a code and separate legal instruments 79 5.1.1. What is understood by a ‘code’? 79 5.1.2. Benefits traditionally attributed to a ‘code’ 80 5.1.3. The current overlaps between the existing instruments in the framework 80 5.1.4. Whether these current overlaps will also be relevant for the proposed additions 81 5.1.5. Contributions and advantages of a code for the stakeholders 81 6. THE APPROACH FOR A CODE – GRADUAL HARMONISATION OR SIMULTANEOUS ADOPTION 83 6.1. Experiences from various member states 83 6.1.1. The Netherlands (gradual adoption) 83 6.1.2. Belgium (simultaneous adoption) 83 6.1.3 Poland (simultaneous adoption) 83 6.1.4. Critical analysis of gradual harmonisation as opposed to simultaneous adoption 83 6.2. The most suitable solution in view of the EU perspective 84 6.2.1. What must be taken into account? 84 7. WHETHER A CODE IS ACHIEVABLE AND THE USE OF ENHANCED CO-OPERATION 86 7.1. A PIL code and the need for supporting national legislation 86 7.2. The use of enhanced co-operation 86 8. SUGGESTED STRUCTURE FOR A CODE, GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND RELEVANT ISSUES 89 8.1. The most suitable legislative instrument for a code 89 8.2. The preferred structure for a code 89 8.3. Basic agreement on the contents of EU PIL legislation 90 CONCLUSIONS 92 REFERENCES 94 5 Policy Department C – Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs ________________________________________________________________________________________ LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Art. Article CISG United Nations Convention On Contracts For The International Sale Of Goods, 1980 (CISG) CJEU Court of Justice of the European Union CMR Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road (CMR) - (Geneva, 19 May 1956) ECJ European Court of Justice ECR European Court Reports EEC European Economic Community EGBGB Introductory Act to the German Civil Code ERPL/REDP European Review Public Law / Revue Européenne de Droit Public EU European Union EWCA Court of Appeal of England and Wales EWHC High Court of England and Wales IPRax Praxis des internationalen Privat- und Verfahrensrechts No. Number NL CC Netherlands Civil Code NL CCP Netherlands Code of Civil Procedure NtER Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Europees Recht OJ Official Journal PIL Private international law PPIL Polish Private International Law Act TCN Third Country National TCNs Third Country Nationals TEU Treaty on European Union TFEU Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union WPNR Weekblad voor Privaatrecht, Notariaat en Registratie ZEuP Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht 6 A European Framework for private international law: current gaps and future perspectives ________________________________________________________________________________________ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report aims to identify the existing gaps in the current framework of private international law in the EU, and to study where additions to this framework are required. It further addresses the question whether a more comprehensive codification of private international law in the EU is needed and, if so, how this can be achieved. The term ‘framework of private international law’ covers all EU instruments in force that relate to the problem of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments and authentic instruments.