»28.« versus »2. Regime« – Kollisionsrechtliche Aspekte eines optionalen europäischen Vertragsrechts (28th versus 2nd Regime – An Optional European Contract Law from a Choice of Law Perspective)

Rabel Journal of Comparative and International Private Law (RabelsZ), Vol. 76, No. 2, pp. 401-442, April 2012

DOI: 10.1628/003372512800133453

Max Planck Private Law Research Paper No. 11/10

43 Pages Posted: 11 Jul 2011 Last revised: 23 May 2013

See all articles by Matteo Fornasier

Matteo Fornasier

Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law

Date Written: July 6, 2011

Abstract

Ten years after placing the idea of a European contract law on the political agenda, the European Commission has announced its intention to take legislative action soon. A proposal for a regulation on an optional instrument of European contract law is expected in the fall of 2011. The regulation would create a set of European contract rules which would exist alongside the various national regimes and could be chosen as the applicable law by the parties to the contract. Such an instrument raises a number of questions with regard to private international law in general and the Rome I Regulation in particular. Should the choice of the European contract law be subject to the general rules on party choice under Rome I or does the new instrument call for special rules? Also, should the European contract law be eligible only where the relevant choice of law rules refer the contract to the law of a Member State or should the parties also be allowed to opt for the European rules where private international law designates the law of a third state as the law applicable to the contract? And finally, how does the optional instrument relate to the CISG and other uniform law conventions? The following paper discusses possible models of how to fit the optional instrument into the system of private international law. In particular, it examines which solution is the best suited to achieve the primary goal of the optional instrument, i.e. to improve the functioning of the internal market.

This article is published in this Research Paper Series with the permission of the rights owner, Mohr Siebeck. Full-text Rabel Journal articles are available via pay-per-view or subscription at IngentaConnect, a provider of digital journals on the Internet.

Note: Downloadable document is in German.

Keywords: European contract law, choice of law, optional instrument, Rome I Regulation, CISG, Hague Convention on the Law Applicable to International Sales of Goods, internal market.

Suggested Citation

Fornasier, Matteo, »28.« versus »2. Regime« – Kollisionsrechtliche Aspekte eines optionalen europäischen Vertragsrechts (28th versus 2nd Regime – An Optional European Contract Law from a Choice of Law Perspective) (July 6, 2011). Rabel Journal of Comparative and International Private Law (RabelsZ), Vol. 76, No. 2, pp. 401-442, April 2012 ; DOI: 10.1628/003372512800133453; Max Planck Private Law Research Paper No. 11/10. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1881510

Matteo Fornasier (Contact Author)

Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law ( email )

Mittelweg 187
Hamburg, D-20148
Germany

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
498
Abstract Views
1,917
rank
54,884
PlumX Metrics