Global Value Chains and Transnational Private Law | LSGL Research Papers | Editorial Note

Abstract

Approaches to globalisation and global justice are constitutive and transformative of our times. Existing global law frameworks such as the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), the UN Sustainable Development Goals Agenda (SDGs) or the OECD Guidelines on Multinational Enterprise (OECD Guidelines) have set out fundamental standards, benchmarks and aspirations for the responsibilisation of businesses in relation to the most pressing environmental, social and economic global challenges. Whereas human rights standards based on soft law have enjoyed wide acceptance for over a decade, current trends in legislation in some legal systems indicate a tendency towards mandatory (or “hard law”) obligations for companies. The first stage of this development could be described as a move to achieve a higher level of transparency. Examples include the EU Non-Financial Reporting Directive (2014/95), which was amended by the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive in 2022. The California Supply Chain Transparency Act (2012) or the UK Modern Slavery Act (2015) provide further examples of these reporting centric and nudging oriented approaches. These have been followed in a second phase by various developments in substantive law.

Keywords: Network, Legal Pluralism, Private International Law, Choice-of-law, Legal Risk, Compliance, Global Value Chains, Transnational Contract Governance, Party Autonomy, Freedom of Contract, Mass Harm Cases, Remedial Procedural Regimes, Global Litigation Orders, Sustainability, Due Diligence Obligations, Private Enforcement, Access to Justice, Private International Law of Torts, International Jurisdiction, Overriding Mandatory Rules, Forum Legis, Business and Human Rights, Labour Standards, Traceability, Separate Legal Personality, Piercing the Corporate Veil, Human Rights Violations, Self-Regulatory Human Rights Instruments, Entity Liability