Publication details
Rethinking the Interaction between EU Legislation and International Conventions in the Area of Private International Law? Critical Analysis of the AG Opinion in case C-21/22
| Authors | |
|---|---|
| Year of publication | 2023 |
| Type | Appeared in Conference without Proceedings |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Description | Since it gained the respective competence under the Amsterdam Treaty, the EU has adopted numerous measures (predominantly regulations) to regulate cross-border relationships between private persons. The growing body of “European private international law” has, to a large extent, replaced, or at least supplemented national legislation of Members States in this area. While the interaction between the two is subject to fairly clear rules (favouring EU legislation), quite the opposite can be said about the interaction between EU legislation and international conventions in the area of private international law. As this is a very complex issue, I would like to limit myself, specifically, to the modus operandi of interaction between EU legislation and pre-existing international conventions (agreements) concluded between Member States on one hand, and third countries on the other, in the field of private international law, both bilateral and multilateral. Although Article 351 TFEU, as well as final provisions of the respectful EU regulations seem to provide a clear answer, the real life of these legal instruments indicates that the solution might not be as straightforward. The aim of my contribution is to critically analyze the line of argumentation brought by the parties, the Commission, as well as some of the Member States, and presented by AG Campos Sánchez-Bordona in his Opinion in case C-21/22. The approach proposed in the Opinion will be scrutinized in historical and systemic context, reflecting principally, but not exclusively, the existing case-law of the CJEU in other areas of EU law (it is being argued that it shall be applied by analogy to the case at hand). Last but not least, I hope to re-open the debate on the future interaction between EU and international law in the field of private international law (and perhaps beyond), as I believe this may be an underlying intention of this case. |