Cofola International 2020. Brexit and its Consequences
KapitolaIs Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements the Way to go?
Rok vydání: 2020https://doi.org/10.5817/CZ.MUNI.P210-9801-2020-3
Abstrakt
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.
Klíčová slova
Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements; Brussels I bis Regulation; Choice of Court Agreements.
Reference
AFFAKI, G. B. and A. G. H. NAÓN. Jurisdictional choices in times of trouble. Paris: International Chamber of Commerce, 2015, 213 p.
Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community. EUR-Lex [online]. 12. 11. 2019 [cit. 1. 8. 2020]. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1580206007232&uri=CELEX%3A12019W/TXT%2802%29
BEAUMONT, P. and M. AHMED. Exclusive choice of court agreements: some issues on the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements and its relationship with the Brussels I Recast especially anti-suit injunctions, concurrent proceedings and the implications of Brexit. Journal of Private International Law, 2017, Vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 386–410. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441048.2017.1348782
BEAUMONT, P. and M. AHMED. I thought we were exclusive? Some issues with the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements on Choice of Court, Brussels Ia and Brexit. abdn.ac.uk [online]. 21. 9. 2017 [cit. 1. 8. 2020]. Available at: https://www.abdn.ac.uk/law/blog/i-thought-we-were-exclusive-some-issues-with-the-hague-convention-on-choice-of-court-brussels-ia-and-brexit/
BORN, B. G. International Arbitration and Forum Selection Agreements: Drafting and Enforcing. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 2016, 468 p.
BREKOULAKIS, L. S. The Notion and the Superiority of Arbitration Agreements over Jurisdiction Agreements: Time to Abandon It? Journal of International Arbitration, 2007, Vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 341–364.
BŘÍZA, P. Choice-of-Court Agreements: Could the Hague Choice of Court Agreements Convention and the Reform of the Brussels I Regulation be the Way out of the Gasser–Owusu Disillusion? Journal of Private International Law, 2009, Vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 537–563. https://doi.org/10.1080/17536235.2009.11424370
Choice of court section. HCCH [online]. [cit. 1. 8. 2020]. Available at: https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/specialised-sections/choice-of-court
CUNIBERTI, G. Denmark to Apply Brussels I Recast. conflictoflaw.net [online]. 24. 3. 2013 [cit. 1. 8. 2020]. Available at: http://conflictoflaws.net/2013/denmark-to-apply-brussels-i-recast/
FRISCHKNECHT, A. A. et al. Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards and Judgements in New York. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 2018, 338 p.
HARTLEY, C. T. Choice-of-court agreements under the European and international instruments: the revised Brussels I Regulation, the Lugano Convention, and the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013, 495 p.
HARTLEY, T. and M. DOGAUCHI. Explanatory Report of Convention of 30 June 2005 on Choice of Court Agreements. HCCH [online]. 8. 11. 2013, 103 p. [cit. 1. 8. 2020]. Available at: https://assets.hcch.net/docs/0de60e2f-e002-408e-98a7-5638e1ebac65.pdf
HOOFT, A. Van. Brexit and the Future of Intellectual Property Litigation. Journal of International Arbitration, 2016, Vol. 33, no. 7, pp. 541–564.
LANDBRECHT, J. The Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC) – an Alternative to International Arbitration? ASA Bulletin, 2016, Vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 112–125.
MASTERS, S. and B. McRAE. What does Brexit mean for the Brussels Regime. Journal of International Arbitration, 2016, Vol. 33, no. 7, pp. 483–500.
NEWING, H. and L. WEBSTER. Could the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements Bring Greater Certainty for Cross-Border Disputes Post Brexit: And What Would This Mean for International Arbitration. Third-Party Funders in International. Dispute Resolution International, 2016, Vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 105–117.
PALERMO, G. The Future of Cross-Border Disputes Settlement: Back to Litigation? In: GONZALEZ-BUENO, C. (ed.). 40 under 40 International Arbitration. Madrid: Dykinson, 2018, 522 p.
ROZEHNALOVÁ, N., K. DRLIČKOVÁ, T. KYSELOVSKÁ and J. VALDHANS. Mezinárodní právo soukromé Evropské unie. Praha: Wolters Kluwer, 2018, 389 p. https://doi.org/10.5817/CPVP2019-S-10
Status Table: Convention of 30 June 2005 on Choice of Court Agreements. HCCH [online]. [cit. 1. 8. 2020]. Available at: https://www.hcch.net/en/instruments/conventions/status-table/?cid=98