This thesis seeks to determine how remedies inter-relate with the European rules on international private law. The thesis is broadly separated into two Parts, the first Part discussing the relationship between remedies and the general part of European international private law, and the second Part discussing the relationship between remedies and the specific parts of European international private law. From this analysis, three threads can be drawn. First, primary right, secondary right and the court order vindicating them are so closely related that, ideally, the same law ought to apply to all. They form a unit which should remain unbroken. Second, the distinction between substantive and ancillary rights is of crucial importance for remedies in the context of both jurisdiction and choice of law. Ancillary rights are those which arise by virtue of the trial process itself, whereas substantive rights are, or are perceived to be, created prior to the trial. The orthodox jurisdictional and choice of law rules only apply to substantive rights. Ancillary rights have their own, separate, rules. With one exception, the only court with jurisdiction over those ancillary rights is the court with jurisdiction over the substantive right to which they are ancillary. Furthermore, the lex fori must be applied to determine the nature of the ancillary right. Third, there exists a rule of exclusion which is of crucial importance for remedies in the context of both the enforcement of foreign judgments and choice of law. This rule of exclusion applies where the application of the foreign court order, whether applied by virtue of enforcing a foreign judgment, or applied by virtue of applying a foreign governing law under the choice of law process, would be too inconvenient for the forum court's machinery. Under such circumstances, the forum court can disapply the foreign law and substitute the closest order it can from its own legal system.

Dans le cadre d’une multiplicité des systèmes européens de protection des droits fondamentaux, celui établi par l’ordre juridique communautaire puis de l’Union européenne se démarque par la spécificité de sa construction. Face aux réticences des Cours constitutionnelles nationales, les dispositions des traités initiaux faisant montre par ailleurs d’une importante faiblesse en termes de protection des droits fondamentaux, la Cour de justice a établi une politique jurisprudentielle de protection de ces derniers à travers une lecture évolutive des dispositions des Traités communautaires et de l’Union européenne.L’instrument des principes généraux du droit a été, pour le juge, prépondérant pour établir une définition et une protection spécifiques des droits fondamentaux dans l’ordre juridique communautaire puis de l’Union européenne. S’inspirant des traditions constitutionnelles communes aux États Membres et des instruments juridiques internationaux au premier desquels figure la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme, la Cour de justice a ainsi su développer une protection des droits fondamentaux qui soit tout à la fois effective et acceptée par les États membres. Aujourd’hui, cette protection des droits fondamentaux se voit redynamisée par la perspective de l’adhésion de l’Union européenne à la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme. Aussi, dans un contexte d’européanisation croisée des droits et d’imbrication des ordres juridiques européens, la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne a su mobiliser tout un argumentaire juridique pour établir une protection des droits fondamentaux cohérente et harmonieuse qu’il convient de resituer. / Within a multiplicity of European systems for the protection of fundamental rights, the one established by Community law and then by the European Union stands out by its specific construction.Faced with the reluctance of national constitutional courts, the provisions of the original treaty making also shows a significant weakness in terms of protection of fundamental rights, the Court of Justice has established a policy of jurisprudence in order to protect them through a progressive reading of the provisions of the Community Treaty and the European Union. The general principles of law instrument was, for the judge, dominating to specifically define and protect fundamental rights in the Community legal order and then the European Union. Inspired by the constitutional traditions common to the Member States and international legal instruments which the first is the European Convention on Human Rights, the Court of Justice has thus developed a protection of fundamental rights that is all together effective and accepted by the Member States. Today, this protection of fundamental rights is boosted by the prospect of adhesion of the European Union to the European Convention on Human Rights. Therefore, in a context of cross-Europeanization of rights and nesting European legal orders, the Court of Justice of the European Union has been able to draw up a list of argued legal points in order to establish a consistent and harmonious human rights protection which has to be specified.