Mutual Trust between the Member States of the European Union and the United Kingdom after Brexit:

The paper follows up on the arguments introduced in the author’s article Mutual Trust as a Way to an Unconditional Automatic Recognition of Foreign Judgments. This paper, titled Mutual Trust between the Member States of the European Union and the United Kingdom after Brexit: Overview discusses, whether there has been a loss of mutual trust between the European Union and the United Kingdom after Brexit. The UK, similarly to EU Member States, has been entrusted with the area of recognition and enforcement of judgements thus far. Should the Member States decrease the level of mutual trust in relation to the UK only because the UK ceased to be part of the EU after 47 years? Practically overnight, more precisely, the day after the transitional period, should the Member States trust the UK less in the light of legislative changes? The article also outlines general possibilities that the UK has regarding which international convention it may accede to. Instead of going into depth, the article presents a basic overview. However, this does not prevent the article to answer, in addition to the questions asked above, how a choice of access to an international convention could affect the level of mutual trust between the UK and EU Member States.

Brexit and Private International Law

My contribution deals with the issue concerning the question arising on the applicable law in and after the transition period set in the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community. The aim of this contribution is to analyze how the English and European laws simultaneously influence one another. This analyzation will lead to the prognosis of the impact Brexit will have on the applicable English law before English courts and the courts of the states of the European Union. The main key question is the role of lex fori in English law. Will English law tend to return to common law rules post-Brexit, and prefer the lex fori?

The Applicable Law for the Third-Party Effects of Assignment of Claim – the Approach of the United Kingdom

The European Commission proposed a new regulation related to the law applicable to third-party effects of the assignment of claims. By this regulation the European Commission is aiming at increasing cross-border transactions, investments and market integration. However, the proposal is facing negative positions of member states, especially the United Kingdom. Even though the United Kingdom will not be obliged to follow the rules from the proposal, because it will come into effect after the transition period ends, its approach on this matter will regulate the third party effects of the assignment of claims in case the of cross-border transactions between a person from a member state and from the United Kingdom. Taking into account the difference between the approaches of the European Union and the United Kingdom, persons involved may get into more legal uncertainty than before.

Jurisdiction and Enforcement after Brexit under Withdrawal Agreement

This paper focuses on the issue of international jurisdiction and enforcement of foreign judgements after Brexit basically until the end of transition period (to 31 December 2020) according to the Withdrawal Agreement, with possible next legal regime. The withdrawal of United Kingdom from the European Union is undoubtedly a significant interference with existing European law. What dimension it takes depends, in particular, on the question of whether or not to complete a comprehensive agreement between the EU and the UK that would establish and direct the future partnership and cooperation in all relevant areas. With the aim of contributing to the discussion concerning EU and UK fundamental rules on jurisdiction and enforcement, this paper provides a view of possible questions and solutions immediately after Brexit until end of transition period. The legal regime of judicial proceedings with an international element initiated before Brexit or during transition period is still relevant under these pre-Brexit rules or Withdrawal Agreement rules. The same situation is with regard to judgements delivered before 31 December 2021. This contribution shall review the state of play immediately after Brexit under Withdrawal Agreement concerning “separation” of EU fundamental rules on jurisdiction and enforcement.

Is Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements the Way to go?

The article demonstrates whether Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements and Brussels I bis Regulation are comparable legal instruments as far as choice of court agreements are concerned. The article analyses the mutual features of the two legal instruments as well as their divergences in terms of choice of court agreements. Therefore, the material and geographical scopes of application, the definition of “a choice of court agreement”, the effects of choice of court agreements as well as the process of the recognition and enforcement under both legal regulations shall be compared. The main goal of this article is to demonstrate that Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements does not present a complete and comprehensive solution in terms of choice of court agreements when compared to Brussels I bis Regulation.