Stone p eu private international law harmonization of laws e

International Journal of Law in Changing World,, 2023

The objective of this work is to emphasize the role of global law in the current legal reality and the importance of autonomy of the will in regulating international legal relationships. The study starts from the existence of a legally fragmented world and the differentiation of three levels of regulation of legal relationships with a foreign element. One block of universal regulation, consisting of international treaties and rules of uniform law, another regional level based on the existence of regional integration organizations with their own regulations, and finally a diminishing state level, formed by national legal systems. Whether in a phase of globalization or post-globalization, the juridical reality of international trade and legal relations, in general, undergo significant changes that are worth analyzing. The perspective of global law allows us to contemplate this juridical reality from an eminently practical standpoint, which places the autonomy of will as the protagonist of the legal framework for international contracting, and points to an increasingly significant role in the field of personal and family legal relations.

Rivista della Cooperazione Giuridica Internazionale, 2017

This paper examines the process of progressive adaptation of national legal systems to the “civil law” legal system. The steady and widespread process of drafting legal instruments for legislative purposes at international level in order to “unify” the private law of the national legal systems confirms this evolution. At this regard, it is to be highlighted the activity conducted since many years by the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law. The same phenomenon is happening within international public law by its progressive and steady “codification” through the multilateral international treaties. The process of progressive harmonisation and unification of national legal systems implies a basic choice for “civil law” instead of “common law” whose raison d’etre and purpose is to guarantee a higher legal certainty in the inter-individual legal relations either of private or of public persons. The “codification” of private international law has the purpose of harmonising national legal systems of States in order to facilitate legal relations and international “circulation” of national legal acts. Yet, the “codification” of international public law raises some doubts because the attempt to create “positive law” or to “crystallize” legal relations between States at international level is not convincing as a matter of law and fact. In fact, interstate legal relations are highly variable due to the ever-changing underlying political and economic grounds. Concerning the means, forms and timings that characterize the adaptation of international public law to such grounds and related changes is very different from the way States’ legal systems adapt to new requests coming from national societies. The paper also examines the role played by case-law in the relationship between

Zak, 1999

The Draft CESL is not only intended to cover intra-European transactions , but will also be applicable to contracts linked to third countries. This twofold effect raises interesting legal questions that are going to be analysed in this chapter from the perspective of Private International Law. During the final stages of the legislative process, certain decisive decisions must be adopted. In particular, from the perspective of Private International Law, there are some key aspects which should also be clarified. Attention should be paid, for example, to certain significant issues such as its relationship with Rome I and II Regulations, or with the CISG; as well as the applicability of the European instrument when a cross-border transaction would be governed by the law of a third country that is not a Member of the EU.

Mohr Siebeck eBooks, 2022

Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht, 2003

Journal of Private International Law, 2011

A. INTRODUCTION This article will examine the recent expansion of EU regulation of the private international law aspects of divorce and its consequences. The application of the regulatory framework made up of Brussels II bis, 1 the Maintenance Regulation, 2 Rome III 3 and the proposed Rome IV 4 to a typical divorce case will be investigated to see if this unwieldy system is coherent in application. The potential for divorce cases to be atomized into individual issues will be examined. It will be asserted that the characterization used by this system best suits the decision making procedure under civil law traditions. The article will critically analyse how the characterization of issues as relating to divorce, maintenance or matrimonial property is likely to function in relation to the typical divorce under English and Welsh, Scottish and Irish law. The problem areas of characterization will be examined and it will be shown that the difficulties encountered in making the common law systems fit the mould are actually substantive problems linked to the common law understanding of marriage as a publicly recognized and enforceable commitment. The tendency for common law jurisdictions to apply domestic law to cases with a foreign element is rooted in this vertical aspect of marriage.

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.

2015

For nearly a hundred years, efforts to unify, harmonize or coordinate private law consisted of the drafting of a diplomatic convention that would enter into force once a specified number of countries had acceded to its terms. 1 Conventions might look to regulate private interaction within a specified (substantive) issue area, or only specific (procedural) interactions involving resolution of disputes arising between private parties. The choice between public and private international law, and between a focus on substance and procedure, were the limited formal strategies employed in the making of international private laws in the early twentieth century.

University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law, 2009

2017

I. Comparative law Comparative law was traditionally defined narrowly as the comparison of different legal systems. Today, it is understood more broadly as that academic discipline that deals with the diversity and plurality of legal systems. This encompasses three strands. The first one is the comparison of legal rules and orders of different legal systems, including the recognition, explanation and sometimes evaluation of similarities and differences, and, if desired, the determination of the better law. A second strand of comparative law is dedicated to analysing the mutual interactions and influences between legal ordersespecially through so-called legal transplants. A third strand, finally, concerns the development of a general understanding of law and legal theory on the basis of individual legal phenomena. All these strands exist both in a pure and an applied variant. Whereas pure comparative law analyses aims merely at the acquisition of knowledge, applied comparative law wants to make such knowledge useful for projects of adjudication and legislation (either legal harmonisation and unification, or domestic law reform). Just as comparative law encompasses a variety of strands, it also encompasses a variety of methods. Comparative law was once confined to the comparison of black letter rules. This was followed by calls for functional comparative laws: legal rules and institution should be compared with regard to their functions, and two institutions are functionally equivalent and thus comparable if they fulfil the same function, even if they are doctrinally different. In addition, and sometimes opposition, much contemporary comparative law is

Agenda Internacional

The term «private international law» lacks a universally agreed definition. This is hardly surprising, since it is often given different meanings in different legal cultures or systems. In the North American common law tradition, for example, it is generally if narrowly equated with conflicts of laws-that is, the specialized principles and rules of national law used by domestic courts to determine which of several competing laws applies to disputes involving people in different countries or of different nationalities or to transactions which cross international boundaries. In such situations, for example, courts can choose to apply the law of the forum, the law of the individual's nationality, or the law of the site of the transaction or occurrence. Most U.S. practitioners and judges think of «private international law» as referring to these choices of law rules. A broader view, typically held by those individuals trained in civil law systems, expands the definition to include the provisions of domestic (national) law governing the exercise of domestic jurisdiction over people, property and transactions in transborder situations, as well as the enforcement of foreign judgments. Here, the main questions tend to focus on the permissible scope of domestic court authority to hear disputes involving foreigners and foreign transactions and to recognize and enforce judgments resulting from adjudications in foreign courts. In many countries, these provisions are comprehensively codified. All three areas-jurisdiction, choice of law, and enforcement of judgments-remain at the heart of most private international law endeavors in one way or another. Private international law conventions, for example, generally aim in one way or another at coordinating these issues between sovereign states. However, many experienced transnational practitioners (and perhaps international lawyers more generally) today find even this broader definition increasingly-and misleadingly-restrictive. If one takes into account recent developments in the various international organizations

TLQ, 2024

The presented article examines the Hague Conference on Private International Law and the in- struments adopted under its auspices, with a particular emphasis on their application within the European Union context. Within the scope of the European Union's competence in judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters, several regulations have been adopted at the Union level, forming a comprehensive framework of Union private international law and procedural law. The Union itself and its Member States are members of the Hague Conference. In situations where both an EU regulation and a Hague convention apply concurrently, it is essential to thoroughly understand the effects of these provisions, their interrelation- ship, and the resolution of the resulting normative pluralism. The aim of this article is to examine the effects of the Hague conventions within EU law and to analyse how the interrelationships between these legal sources are managed for the practical application of rules in the resolution of disputes involving a foreign element.