Consumer protection and overriding mandatory rules in the Rome I Regulation

2012 ◽  
pp. 239-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Bisping
Keyword(s):  
Consumer Protection ◽  
Mandatory Rules ◽  
Rome I

scholarly journals Law Applicable to Consumer Contracts: Interaction of the Rome I Regulation and EU-directive-based Rules on Conflicts of Laws

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ragne Piir ◽  
Karin Sein
Keyword(s):  
Consumer Protection ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Conflict Of Laws ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Article 9 ◽  
Consumer Contracts ◽  
Mandatory Rules ◽  
Rome I ◽  
Apparent Problem

The article discusses the abundance and interaction of rules aimed at determining the law applicable to cross-border consumer contracts. Firstly, it examines whether there is a continuing need for conflict-of-laws rules that stem from consumer-related directives. It then addresses the question of whether the Estonian Law of Obligations Act’s conflict-of-laws rules comply with the consumer-related directives. Lastly, the relations between the conflict‑of‑laws rules stemming from consumer-related directives and the Rome I Regulation are analysed. The authors conclude that the level of consumer protection afforded by Rome I seems to allow for a waiver of the various simultaneously existing directive-based conflict rules. Such renunciation would not only resolve the issue of inaccurate transposition to national laws – an apparent problem for the Estonian legislator as well – but also contribute to legal certainty. While the conflict-of-laws rules of Rome I and the national directive-based rules coexist, the latter are to be considered subordinately to Rome I. The conflict rules of the Estonian Law of Obligations Act are deemed to be only domestically mandatory and therefore not to be viewed as overriding mandatory rules in the sense of Article 9 of Rome I.

Consumer Protection in the EU Conflict-of-Laws Framework

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 169-193
Author(s):  
Carlos Llorente
Keyword(s):  
Consumer Protection ◽  
Conflict Of Laws ◽  
Consumer Law ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Consumer Contracts ◽  
Centre Of Rotation ◽  
Globalized World ◽  
Rome I ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
The Eu

Consumer law nowadays pervades all areas of activity where consumers are present. The EU, along with its Member States, is probably one of the leading actors in promoting consumer protection. Also, in a globalized world, where the fact of being a consumer is a valuable asset (given their purchasing power), the cross-border implications of consumer contracts need to be effectively tackled by legislators. The EU has tried to address global legal concerns concerning consumer contracts by producing conflict-of-law rules such as article 6 of the Rome I Regulation and others contained in specifically-focused directives. This article reviews the scope and application of those rules and offers some insight into the not-so-well construed interaction between them all, keeping in mind that article 6 of the Rome I Regulation should be the centre of rotation of all EU PIL law in this field.

Part F Cross-Border Issues, 42 Cross-Border Financial Services, Consumer Protection, and Unfair Contract Terms

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Proctor Charles
Keyword(s):  
Consumer Protection ◽  
Financial Services ◽  
Customer Relationship ◽  
Financial Instruments ◽  
Trading System ◽  
Consumer Law ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Multilateral Trading System ◽  
Rome I ◽  
The Impact

This chapter considers the provisions of Rome I that deal specifically with financial instruments and contracts for the provision of financial services. It discusses the background to Rome I and its consumer protection rules; the meaning of ‘financial instruments’ for Rome I purposes; contracts concluded within a multilateral trading system (Articles 4(1)(h) and 6(4)(e)); consumer law exemptions applicable to financial instruments, rights issues, and takeover offers (Article 6(4)(d)); the consumer law exemption relating to foreign services (Article 6(4)(a)); the banker-customer relationship; and the impact of domestic consumer laws.

Posted Workers in Europe from a Private International Law Perspective

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 219-244
Author(s):  
Louise Merrett
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Employment Law ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Mandatory Rules ◽  
The Law ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Employment Rights ◽  
Rome I

Abstract Cases involving the posting of workers will inevitably involve international elements and therefore issues of private international law. Historically, it has been assumed that English employment law is territorial: in particular section 204 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 provides that the provisions of the Act apply irrespective of the law applicable to the contract. This contribution examines this proposition through the perspective of private international law principles, and also considers the compatibility of section 204 with the private international law rules in the Posted Workers Directive and the new definition of overriding mandatory rules in the Rome I Regulation.

Does Transparency Lead to Unfairness? The Court of Justice of the European Union on the Duty to Inform about Mandatory Rules

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 334-342
Author(s):  
Nicholas Mouttotos
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Note ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Status ◽  
Mandatory Rules ◽  
Duty To Inform ◽  
Article 5 ◽  
Rome I ◽  
Missed Opportunity

AbstractThe judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Ottília Lovasné Tóth v ERSTE Bank Hungary Zrt can be seen as a missed opportunity, first, in elaborating on Article 3(1) of Directive 93/13, in particular whether the two criteria set by the article, of a term causing a ‘significant imbalance’ and it being contrary to ‘good faith’ should be assessed separately; and, second, in clarifying the status of the transparency requirement found in Article 5 of the directive. This case note focuses on the latter question, taking into account the repercussions of the judgment of the CJEU in Verein für Konsumenteninformation v Amazon EU Sàrl. In the latter case, the CJEU introduced an information duty about the existence of mandatory rules such as Article 6(2) of Rome I Regulation. In its decision in Ottília Lovasné Tóth, the CJEU decided to limit the scope of the judgment in Amazon to the particular circumstances of that case.

10 Posted Workers in Europe from a Private International Law Perspective

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 219-244
Author(s):  
Louise Merrett
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Employment Law ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Mandatory Rules ◽  
The Law ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Employment Rights ◽  
Rome I

AbstractCases involving the posting of workers will inevitably involve international elements and therefore issues of private international law. Historically, it has been assumed that English employment law is territorial: in particular section 204 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 provides that the provisions of the Act apply irrespective of the law applicable to the contract. This contribution examines this proposition through the perspective of private international law principles, and also considers the compatibility of section 204 with the private international law rules in the Posted Workers Directive and the new definition of overriding mandatory rules in the Rome I Regulation.

Posted Workers in Europe from a Private International Law Perspective

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 219-244 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Merrett
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Employment Law ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Mandatory Rules ◽  
The Law ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Employment Rights ◽  
Rome I

AbstractCases involving the posting of workers will inevitably involve international elements and therefore issues of private international law. Historically, it has been assumed that English employment law is territorial: in particular section 204 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 provides that the provisions of the Act apply irrespective of the law applicable to the contract. This contribution examines this proposition through the perspective of private international law principles, and also considers the compatibility of section 204 with the private international law rules in the Posted Workers Directive and the new definition of overriding mandatory rules in the Rome I Regulation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document