Harmonization of Private Law and the destiny of overriding mandatory provisions: The Example of Consumer Protection under The Common European Sales Law
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26481/marble.2013.v4.161Abstract
The CESL is not quite as “complete” a sales law as its name suggests. It cannot, in the opinion of this author, be considered “hard core” contract law as it has substantial gaps, which need to be filled by the national laws of the member states.5 As the objectives of the CESL are consumer protection and also the removing of obstacles in the internal market, it is needless to say that a balance had to be struck. Therefore, the CESL does not contain the highest degree of consumer protection possible, albeit the allegations of the European Commission that it does achieve a level of protection that is on average higher than that which the member states’ laws have to offer.6 Member states have on top of that lost the power to impose their own mandatory provisions, which protect the consumer, as the CESL imposes its own mandatory rules, when chosen by the parties. The relationship of the CESL and the Regulation on the law applicable to contractual obligations will be the subject of this paper. Special attention will be paid to the application mechanism, which, as the drafters argue will make Article 6 Rome I superfluous where parties have chosen the CESL to govern their contract, which will however not make the application of all other PIL rules applicable to the contract.
References
Primary sources:
Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Common European Sales Law, COM (2011) 635 (final).
Regulation (EC) No. 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17th June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations, OJ L 177, 4.7.2008, p.6-16.
Case Law:
Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 9th November 2000 in Case 381/98, Ingmar GB v Eaton leanoard Technologies Inc.
Judgment of the Court of 28th March 2000 in Case C- 7/98, Dieter Krombach v André Bamberski.
Judgement of the German Federal Court of Justice on consumer credits BGH 13 December 2005 XI ZR 82/05.
Secondary Sources:
Jürgen Basedow et. al: Handwörterbuch des Europäischen Privatrechts, Band II. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009.
Alexander J. Belohlavek: Rome Convention and Rome I Regulation, Volume 2. Juris Publishers, 2010.
Christoph Busch: “From a Horizontal Instrument to a Common European Sales Law – The Development of European Consumer and Market law in 2011”; in: Zeitschrift für Europäisches Unternehmens- und Verbraucherrecht, Issue 1, pp. 48-53, 2012.
Horst Eidenmüller et. al: “The Proposal for a Regulation on a Common European Sales Law: Deficits of the Most Recent textual layer of European Contract law”; in: The Edinburgh Law Review, Issue 16:3, pp. 301-357, 2012.
Martijn Hesselink: “Non-mandatory rules in European Contract Law”; in: European Review of Contract law, Issue 1, pp. 44-86, 2005.
Martijn Hesselink: “How to Opt into the CESL? Brief Comments on the Commission’s proposal for a Regulation” in: European Review of Private Law, Issue 1, pp. 195-212, 2012.
Geraint G. Howells & Stephen Weatherill: Consumer Protection law, 2nd Edition. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing, 2005.
Dr. Dr. h. c. Gerhard Kegel & Dr. Klaus Schurig: Internationales Privatrecht – Ein Studienbuch. München: C.H. Beck, 9th Edition, 2004.
Nicole Kornet: Contract Interpretation and Gap Filling: Comparative and theoretical perspectives. Antwerpen: Intersentia, 2006.
Jan-Jaap Kuipers: EU Law and Private International Law – The Interrelationship in Contractual Obligations. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1st Edition, 2012.
Jan-Jaap Kuipers & Sara Migliorini: “Qu’est-ce que sont les lois de police? Une querelle franco-allemand auprès de la communautarisation de la Convention de Rome”; in: European Review of Private Law, Issue 2, 2011, pp. 187-207.
Vanessa Mak: “Standards of Protection: In search for the average consumer of EU law in the Proposal for a Consumer Rights Directive”; in: European Review of Private Law, Volume 1, pp. 25-42, 2011.
Chantal Mak: “Europe-Building through Private Law. Lessons of Constitutional Theory”. Amsterdam Law School Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2012-46.
Michael Martinek: “Unsystematische Überregulierung und kontraintentionale Effekte im Europäischen Verbraucherschutzrecht oder: Weniger wäre mehr”; in Stefan Grundmann (ed.): Systembildung und Systemlücken in Kerngebieten des Europäischen Privatrechts. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000.
Pierre Mayer & Vincent Heuzé: Droit International Privé. Paris: Montchrestien, 9th Edition, 2007.
Thomas Rauscher: Internationales Privatrecht. Heidelberg: C.F.Müller, 3rd edition, 2009.
Prof. Dr. Norbert Reich: “Verbraucherrechte als – unverzichtbare – subjektive Rechte passiver Marktbürger”; in Stefan Grundmann (ed.): Systembildung und Systemlücken in Kerngebieten des Europäischen Privatrechts. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000.
Oliver Remien: Zwingendes Vertragsrecht und Grundfreiheiten des EG Rechts. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003.
Katrin Schilling: Binnenmarktkollisionsrecht. Berlin: De Gruyter Recht, 2006.
Anne Sinay-Cytermann : “La protection de la partie faible en droit international privé” in: Le Droit International Privé: Esprit et Méthodes. Mélanges en l’honneur de Paul Lagarde. Paris: Dalloz, 2005.
Ansgar Staudinger: “Der Ordre Public Einwand im Europäischen Zivilverfahrensrecht”; in: European Legal Forum 5, pp. 273-281, 2004.
Christian Von Bar: Internationales Privatrecht – Erster Band: Allgemeine Lehren. München: C.H. Beck, 1987.
Internet Sources:
Martine Behar-Touchais: “The functioning of the CESL within the framework of the Rome 1 Regulation”; Study conducted on behalf of the European Parliament: Policy Department C: Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, 2012. Retrieved from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/studies .
Christopher Bisping: “The Common European Sales Law and Mandatory provisions in the conflict of laws”; Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2012-23, University of Warwick. Retrieved from www.ssrn.com/abstract=2192501.
Catherine Kessedjian: “ Public Order in European Law”; in: Erasmus Law Review, Volume 1, Issue 1, pp. 25-36, 2007. Retrieved from. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1026205.
Gabrielle Kaufmann-Kohler & Andreas Bucher : “Droit International Privé – Fascicule 2”. Geneva : University of Geneva Faculty of law, 2004. Retrived from http://www.unige.ch/droit/e-cours/documents/4864efd7ee79d.pdf, last visited 17th June 2013.
Prof. Dr. Stefan Leible: “The proposal for a Common European Sales Law – How it should function within the existing legal orders”, European Parliament, 2012. Retrieved from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/document/activities/cont/201203/20120307ATT40127/ 20120307ATT40127EN.pdf.
Gary Low: “Unitas via Diversitas: Can the Common European Sales Law Harmonize through Diversity?”in; Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, Volume 1, 2012. Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=1991070 .
Christophe Rosset: Verbraucherverträge und die Rom I –Verordnung. GRIN-Verlag, 2010; retrieved via http://books.google.de/books?id=jhago0TIDcsC&pg=PA1&lpg=PA1&dq=bundesgerichtshof+rich tlinie+rom+I&source=bl&ots=9x6Hpfek7G&sig=8C3ospc4HZtBLBqLuhlKgVHPY_8&hl=de&sa=X &ei=fyyAUbLcCcbRhAeCi4DQCA&ved=0CGkQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=bundesgerichtshof%20 richtlinie%20rom%20I&f=false .
Gisela Rühl: “The Common European Sales Law: 28th Regime, 2nd Regime or 1st Regime?”; Maastricht European Private Law Institute, Working paper No. 2012/5. Maastricht: Faculty of Law, 2012. Retrieved from www.ssrn.com/abstract=2025879.
Jacobien W. Rutgers: “An Optional Instrument and Social Dumping Revisited”; European Commission, 2011. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/justice/news/consulting_public/0052/contributions/354_en.pdf.
