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.

scholarly journals European Online Marketplace – New Measures for Consumer Protection against “Old Conflict of Laws Rules”

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-41
Author(s):  
Agata Jaroszek
Keyword(s):  
Consumer Protection ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Digital Content ◽  
Conflict Of Laws ◽  
Online Marketplace ◽  
Consumer Rights ◽  
General Rules ◽  
Consumer Contracts ◽  
Contractual Obligations ◽  
Rome I

The paper aims at discussing the rationale for protecting consumers under the new directive on consumer rights (CRD) and its relation to conflict of law rules under the Regulation on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I).The author is of the opinion the newly adopted legal framework for consumer protection under the directive on consumer rights seems to be more predictable especially in terms of supporting consumers with more mandatory information before the conclusion of a contract with a professional as well as a single 14 day withdrawal period for all Member States. However, the level of consumer protection in the purchase of digital content is insufficient and from the perspective of conflict of laws rules for consumer contracts under Rome I, a consumer who actively makes a purchase from a professional from another Member State or a third country cannot expect the special protective rules envisaged in the regime under CRD and Rome I to be applied by default; rather, the general rules come into play.

Enforcement of Foreign Judgment in E-Commerce Consumer Contracts In Malaysia: Issues and Challenges

2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 67
Author(s):  
Shazanah Sarwar Khan ◽  
SHEELA JAYABALAN
Keyword(s):  
Electronic Commerce ◽  
Consumer Protection ◽  
Convenient Method ◽  
Consumer Contract ◽  
Conflict Of Laws ◽  
Online Transactions ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Consumer Contracts ◽  
Foreign Judgment

Electronic commerce or e-commerce is gaining momentum in Malaysia. Consumers are finding transacting online to be a convenient method especially to buy goods and services. As online transactions involve transborder commerce, disputes are inevitable. As such the question of conflict of laws arises, one of which involves enforcement of foreign judgement. Even though there is a law regulating enforcement of foreign judgement in Malaysia, however it does not take into consideration consumer protection. Adapting doctrinal research, this article discusses issues and challenges arising in the enforcement of foreign judgement in e-commerce consumer contracts in Malaysia. Keywords: Enforcement of Foreign Judgement, Reciprocal Enforcement of Foreign Judgement Act 1958, Brussels I Regulation, E-Commerce Consumer Contract

Einstweiliger Rechtsschutz in grenzüberschreitenden Schiedsverfahren

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Mink
Keyword(s):  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Conflict Of Laws ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Arbitral Proceedings ◽  
Contractual Obligations ◽  
Substantive Law ◽  
Interim Measures ◽  
Rome I ◽  
Einstweiliger Rechtsschutz

The thesis focuses on the difficulties of determining the applicable law in interim proceedings in cross-border arbitral proceedings. First, it examines whether arbitral tribunals have a lex arbitri. Subsequently, the various possibilities of interim measures are described and the question is discussed whether arbitral tribunals have to refer to the Rome I Regulation or Section 1051 of the German Code of Civil Procedure in order to determine the applicable conflict of laws for contractual obligations. Then, it is analysed how the applicable substantive law is to be determined or how to proceed in case of non-determinability of such. Finally, the consequences of the application of a substitute law for the main proceedings are discussed.

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.

Right to a name: cross-border family-legal aspects of implementation

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-56
Author(s):  
Elena Voytovich
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Coherent System ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Family Status ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Conflict Of Laws ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
The Right

The increase of cross-border contacts of individuals has shifted the emphasis in modern studies of the right to a name in Civil and Family law to Human rights and Private International Law. The article examines the problems of cross-border implementation of the right of an individual to a name, which are a consequence of state control over the circulation of names, as well as conflicts of national laws. The author offers to get acquainted with the practice of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of the European Union, which serves as an illustration of the peculiarities of the implementation of the right to a surname in the context of convergence of legal systems. The proposed court decisions demonstrate new approaches to protecting the right of an individual to a surname and open the way to the formation of an internally consistent, coherent system of rules governing the right to a name. The article analyzes the international private legal aspects of the implementation of the right to a surname; special attention is paid to the conflicting principles of determining the law to be applied. The author concludes that domestic practice of assigning surnames should seek to achieve legal certainty. Such practice should not interfere with the exercise of the right to respect for private and family life, freedom of movement and choice of place of residence, or discriminate. Taking into account the results of international justice, national rules on names, conflict of laws norms require revision and updating. The consistent application of lex personalis in determining the applicable law can lead to situations in which the identity of the individual will be in doubt. The solution to this problem is seen not only in improving conflict of laws approaches, but also in the mechanism of recognition of foreign administrative acts. The implementation of this proposal will eliminate lame relationships, ensure legal certainty and stability of the person’s status. The author also proposes to distinguish between conflict of laws rules governing family status and conflict of laws rules governing civil status of an individual.

Consumer Protection and Jurisdiction

2021 ◽  
pp. 331-368
Author(s):  
Julia Hörnle
Keyword(s):  
Consumer Protection ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Undue Influence ◽  
Choice Of Law ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Business Interests ◽  
The Us ◽  
Consumer Contracts ◽  
Rome I ◽  
The Eu

Chapter 10 examines the validity and enforceability of forum selection (jurisdiction) and choice of law (applicable law) clauses in consumer contracts in the US and in the EU, comparing two differing approaches to finding a balance between business’ interests, transactional efficiency, and consumer protection in e-commerce. The chapter explains the US jurisprudence, which has established a presumption in favour of the validity of jurisdiction and choice of law clauses in the absence of fraud, undue influence, or overweening bargaining power (US Supreme Court in Bremen and Carnival Cruise Lines v Shute). It contrasts the contractual analysis in the US, which may hold certain forms of clauses in adhesion contracts unenforceable, depending on the applicable state law with the stricter public policy approach in the EU, which implements consumer protection law through its private international law rules in the Brussels I Regulation and the Rome I Regulation. It examines the EU rules with respect to the types of consumers and consumer contracts to which the protective jurisdictional rules apply. The chapter critically analyses the jurisprudence on jurisdiction in internet and e-commerce cases and incisively conceptualizes the legal approaches and latest developments on both sides of the Atlantic. This includes the directing/targeting line of cases after Pammer/Alpenhof in the EU.

scholarly journals Mercado único digital: medidas contra el bloqueo geográfico injustificado, contratos de consumo concluidos por vía electrónica y normas de Derecho internacional privado= Eu digital single market: measures against unjustified geo-blocking, electronic consumer contracts and the conflict of laws

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 117
Author(s):  
Raúl Lafuente Sánchez
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Single Market ◽  
Habitual Residence ◽  
Place Of Residence ◽  
Conflict Of Laws ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Consumer Contracts ◽  
Rome I

Resumen: El Reglamento sobre bloqueo geográfico injustificado tiene como finalidad eliminar la discriminación directa e indirecta basada en la nacionalidad, el lugar de residencia o el lugar de esta­blecimiento de los clientes. Para alcanzar este objetivo, prohíbe a los comerciantes el uso de medidas tecnológicas o de otro tipo con el fin de bloquear o limitar el acceso de los clientes a sus interfaces en línea. Por otra parte, dispone que del cumplimiento del Reglamento no se derivará que el comerciante dirige sus actividades al domicilio o residencia habitual del consumidor en el sentido de lo dispuesto en los Reglamentos Bruselas I bis y Roma I. De esta declaración puede derivarse una posible interferencia con los criterios ya definidos en la jurisprudencia del Tribunal de Justicia a la hora de delimitar cuando un comerciante ha dirigido sus actividades al Estado miembro del domicilio o residencia habitual del consumidor. En el presente trabajo estudio y analizo esta cuestión, así como sus posibles consecuencias en los contratos de consumo celebrados por vía electrónica.Palabras clave: mercado único digital, bloqueo geográfico injustificado, reglamento (UE) 2018/302, derecho internacional privado, contratos de consumo electrónicos, concepto de “actividades dirigidas”. Abstract: The unjustified geo-blocking Regulation aims to eliminate direct and indirect discrimi­nation based on customers’ nationality, place of residence or place of establishment. In order to achie­ve this goal, prohibits to traders the use of technological measures or otherwise, to block or limit a customer’s access to their online interfaces for reasons related to the customer’s nationality, place of residence or place of establishment. Moreover, the Regulation provides that compliance with its rules shall not be construed as implying that a trader directs activities to the Member State of the consumer’s habitual residence or domicile within the meaning of Brussels I Regulation and Rome I Regulation. This statement raises a possible interference with the criteria identified in the European Court of Justice case law, in order to delimit when a trader has directed his activities to the Member State of the consumer’s habitual residence or domicile. In this paper I analyze the aforementioned issue and its consequences for the electronic consumer contracts.Keywords: EU digital single market, unjustified geo-blocking, regulation (EU) 2018/302, conflict of laws, electronic consumer contracts, concept of “directing activities”.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document