Übergreifende Begrifflichkeiten im europäischen Zivilverfahrens- und Kollisionsrecht – Grund und Grenzen der rechtsaktsübergreifenden Auslegung dargestellt am Beispiel vertraglicher und außervertraglicher Schuldverhältnisse (Uniform Terminology in European Private International Law)
Rabel Journal of Comparative and International Private Law (RabelsZ), Vol. 77, No. 1, pp. 31-68, January 2013
39 Pages Posted: 1 Sep 2012 Last revised: 8 May 2014
Date Written: August 15, 2012
Autonomous and interdependent interpretation is a valuable tool for completing and systematising the growing body of European private international law. Yet, the general presumption in favour of uniform interpretation of similar notions in the various European Regulations as set out in Recital (7) of both Rome I and Rome II is overly simplistic. Total uniformity cannot be achieved because provisions governing conflict of laws and jurisdiction often differ in both function and substance.
Against this background, this paper analyses the rationale as well as the limits of autonomous and inter-instrumental interpretation. It demonstrates that uniform concepts may be developed in areas where the underlying motives behind European provisions on conflict of laws and jurisdiction coincide, e.g. in the context of consumer and employment contracts or direct claims under Rome II and Brussels I. These parallels pave the way for an autonomous understanding of the various notions used in the respective Regulations. However, interdependent interpretation finds its limits in teleological considerations as well as in the persisting functional differences between European instruments on conflict of laws and jurisdiction.
This article is published in this Research Paper Series with the permission of the rights owner, Mohr Siebeck. All 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: Rome I, Rome II, Brussels I, autonomous interpretation, private international law, conflict of laws, jurisdiction, ECJ, European Private law, European Union, consumer contracts, employment contracs, insurance contracts, sale, provision of services
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation