Non-Contractual Obligations in Private International Law This thesis deals with non-contractual obligations in private international law. The most important law in this area is the Rome II Regulation on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations that applies since 11 January 2009. The Regulation creates a common regime of conflict of law rules for most civil and commercial non-contractual obligations. The general rule is the law of the place of injury (lex loci damni). The rule is subject to two exceptions, the common habitual residence exception and a general escape clause based on the closer connection principle. Special rules are laid down for some non-contractual obligations, such as product liability, unfair competition and acts restricting free competition, environmental damages, infringement of intellectual property rights, unjust enrichment, negotiorum gestio and culpa in contrahendo. However, in most cases, the parties may agree on the law applicable to the non- contractual obligations between them. Post-tort agreements may be made between all parties whereas pre-tort agreements are allowed only where all the parties are pursuing commercial activity. Where the Rome II Regulation does not apply the courts will look to the relevant national legislation, which is the Private...

Résumé The aim of the diploma thesis called Choice of applicable law in private international law is to provide a comprehensive analysis of the given area, justify the need and benefits of choice of law in situations involving private international law and to suggest possibilities for future development. The first section is dedicated to conflict-of-law rules, their construction, characterization and function. Choice of law is also analyzed from the perspective of the connecting factor. The following part focuses on the history of choice of law in private international law from the initial reflections in the Middle Ages to the rapid development in the second half of the 20th century. In the third chapter, choice of law is described in general terms, including an analysis of individual types of choice of law and analysis of renvoi. In the following sections, choice of applicable law in major legal situations involving private international law is explored. Firstly, contractual obligations are discussed, the main focus being the Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I). Secondly, non-contractual obligations are analyzed mainly in terms of the Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council on...

Le règlement Rome II sur la loi applicable aux obligations non contractuelles énonce une règle de conflit commune aux États membres de l’Union européenne. La sécurité juridique représente son objectif substantiel premier. Sur ce fondement en particulier, le texte érige un élément principal de rattachement relativement inédit en droit international privé comparé : le dommage. La confrontation de ce critère à l’exigence de sécurité juridique met cependant en lumière le caractère inachevé de l’œuvre européenne. L’amphibologie de la notion de dommage risque, en effet, de mettre à mal la satisfaction de l’exigence de sécurité. Cette recherche entend proposer des solutions à l’incomplétude du critère du dommage. Des réflexions d’ordre théorique et pratique conduisent à envisager deux séries de réponses. Les premières s’adressent au praticien. Elles consistent en l’élaboration d’une notion conflictuelle autonome de dommage, distincte de la notion substantielle de préjudice. Une seconde solution s’adresse directement au législateur de l’Union, dans l’hypothèse d’une révision de la règle européenne de conflit de lois. Il s’agit de proposer une autre méthodologie, qui repose sur la consécration d’un droit international privé européen du dommage. Celle-Ci s’entend de l’élaboration de nouvelles catégories conflictuelles, exclusivement organisées autour du dommage. / The Rome II regulation on the law applicable to non-Contractual obligations states a common rule of conflict into the European Union. Legal security is one of its main purposes and justifies more specifically the choice of an unprecedented connecting factor in comparative international private law: the damage. Nevertheless, the notion of damage covers many different meanings in the different countries of European Union. This plurality may compromise the satisfaction of legal security and, by failing to address this specific issue, the European regulation Rome II turns out to be unfinished.This study intends to suggest solutions to effectively complement and harmonize the notion of damage as a connecting factor in European international private law.Some theoretical and practical reflections lead us to consider two types of answer. The first one is aimed at practitioners. It consists in drawing up an autonomous notion of damage distinct from the material notion of prejudice. A second solution is aimed at the European legislator. It consists in a new methodology based on the adoption of a European international private law of the damage. This means drawing up new conflict categories, exclusively organized around the notion of damage.

The aim of this thesis is to analyze the proper law under the Rome I Regulation and the Rome II Regulation and find out the differences and similarities between them. The thesis is composed of introduction, four parts and conclusion. The part One describes general and theoretical topics of European Private International Law (EPIL) - explains the notion and methods of regulation of Private International Law, notion, meaning, and sources of law and principles of application of EPIL. The part Two is concerned with the history of creation, structure, and scope of the Rome I and Rome II Regulations. Parts Three and Four represent the core of this thesis. The part Three analyzes the proper law of contract under the Rome I Regulation and non- contractual obligations under the Rome II Regulation. It focuses on ascertaining of the applicable law for obligations, on limits of the proper law and other related questions. Part Four summarizes all knowledge. It illustrates the results of comparison of the Rome I and Rome II Regulations.

In this paper we examine contractual and non-contractual obligations in situations involving a conflict of law. The special emphasis is given to overriding mandatory rules, the importance and impacts of these rules of law on civil and commercial relations with international element. This thesis is composed of four parts and each of them is subdivided into further sections and paragraphs. In the first part, we introduce the general theory as theoretical base of the subject and we define the key terms. The question concerning the role of Czech courts in the application of foreign law is also mentioned. Subsequently, we analyze national Czech legislation and we focus on the relevant provisions contained in the draft of new Private International Law Act. By becoming Member State of the European Union in 2004, Czech Republic undertook to accede to the 1980 Rome Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations. Second chapter is dedicated to this international treaty which has clarified the concept of "mandatory rules" but has also given rise to some qualification problems. We discuss the relationship between overriding mandatory rules and protective mandatory rules (particularly rules of consumer and labour law) and present the main approaches to this problem. Rome I and Rome II regulations...

<p>Den här uppsatsen syftar till att utreda vilket lands lag som blir tillämplig vid en internationell tvist gällande utomobligatoriska förpliktelser vid immaterialrättsintrång, särskilt vid upphovsrättsintrång. Tyngdpunkten ligger i de problem som uppstår då någon gör sig skyldig till ett upphovsrättsintrång med relation till flera länder.</p><p>Utgångspunkten är Rom II-förordningen och dess åttonde artikel. I artikeln stadgas det att tillämplig lag för en utomobligatorisk förpliktelse som har sin grund i ett immaterialrättsintrång skall vara lagen i det land där skydd görs gällande.</p><p>Vad innebär då uttrycket ”där skydd görs gällande”? När det gäller registrerade rättigheter, såsom patent och varumärken, innebär artikeln att tillämplig lag ska var lagen i det land där rättigheten är registrerad. Det går dock inte att tillämpa samma princip på oregistrerade rättigheter. När det gäller oregistrerade rättigheter ska istället lagen i det land där intrånget skett vara tillämplig.</p><p>Upphovsrätt är en sådan oregistrerad rättighet som, enligt svensk rätt, uppstår så fort verket är färdigt och har uppnått en viss verkshöjd. Det här synsättet görs även gällande i de flesta andra länder i världen då upphovsrätten i mångt och mycket bygger på Bernkonventionens lydelse från 1886.</p><p>Svårigheten som domstolarna kommer att ställas inför är då någon gör sig skyldig till ett upphovsrättsintrång med relation till flera länder. Eftersom skyddet görs gällande i det land där intrånget skett blir frågan om vilket lands lag som ska vara tillämplig i dessa fall.</p><p>Domstolarna kommer att behöva ta ställning och i den här uppsatsen framställs en del förslag till möjliga lösningar.</p><p>Uppsatsen diskuterar även om reglerna i artikel 8 Rom II-förordningen är de bästa då det gäller upphovsrättsintrång generellt.</p> / <p>This essay aims to investigate which national law that is applicable to an international dispute concerning non-contractual obligations in international property rights (IPR) violations, particularly in copyright infringement. The emphasis lies on the problems that arise when someone is found guilty of copyright infringement with a connection to several countries.</p><p>The starting point is the Rome II-regulation and its eighth article. The article states that the law applicable to a non-contractual obligation arising from an infringement of an intellectual property right shall be the law of the country for which protection is claimed.</p><p>What does then the phrase “for which protection is claimed” mean? In the case of registered rights, such as patents and trademarks, the article implies that the applicable law shall be the law of the country where they are registered. It is not possible however to apply the same principle to unregistered rights. In the case of unregistered rights it is instead the law of the country where the violation occurred that shall be applied.</p><p>Copyright is an unregistered right which, according to Swedish law, appears as soon as the work is finished and has reached a certain level of originality. This approach is also applicable in most other countries of the world where copyright law is largely based on the Berne Convention from 1886.</p><p>The difficulty that courts will face is when someone is claimed guilty of a copyright infringement with a connection to several countries. Given that protection is claimed in the country where the violation occurred, the question will be of which national law that should be applied in these cases.</p><p>The courts will have to take a position and this paper presents some possible solutions. The essay also discusses if the rules of article 8 of the Rome II-regulation are the best applicable rules in the case of copyright infringement in general.</p>

Den här uppsatsen syftar till att utreda vilket lands lag som blir tillämplig vid en internationell tvist gällande utomobligatoriska förpliktelser vid immaterialrättsintrång, särskilt vid upphovsrättsintrång. Tyngdpunkten ligger i de problem som uppstår då någon gör sig skyldig till ett upphovsrättsintrång med relation till flera länder. Utgångspunkten är Rom II-förordningen och dess åttonde artikel. I artikeln stadgas det att tillämplig lag för en utomobligatorisk förpliktelse som har sin grund i ett immaterialrättsintrång skall vara lagen i det land där skydd görs gällande. Vad innebär då uttrycket ”där skydd görs gällande”? När det gäller registrerade rättigheter, såsom patent och varumärken, innebär artikeln att tillämplig lag ska var lagen i det land där rättigheten är registrerad. Det går dock inte att tillämpa samma princip på oregistrerade rättigheter. När det gäller oregistrerade rättigheter ska istället lagen i det land där intrånget skett vara tillämplig. Upphovsrätt är en sådan oregistrerad rättighet som, enligt svensk rätt, uppstår så fort verket är färdigt och har uppnått en viss verkshöjd. Det här synsättet görs även gällande i de flesta andra länder i världen då upphovsrätten i mångt och mycket bygger på Bernkonventionens lydelse från 1886. Svårigheten som domstolarna kommer att ställas inför är då någon gör sig skyldig till ett upphovsrättsintrång med relation till flera länder. Eftersom skyddet görs gällande i det land där intrånget skett blir frågan om vilket lands lag som ska vara tillämplig i dessa fall. Domstolarna kommer att behöva ta ställning och i den här uppsatsen framställs en del förslag till möjliga lösningar. Uppsatsen diskuterar även om reglerna i artikel 8 Rom II-förordningen är de bästa då det gäller upphovsrättsintrång generellt. / This essay aims to investigate which national law that is applicable to an international dispute concerning non-contractual obligations in international property rights (IPR) violations, particularly in copyright infringement. The emphasis lies on the problems that arise when someone is found guilty of copyright infringement with a connection to several countries. The starting point is the Rome II-regulation and its eighth article. The article states that the law applicable to a non-contractual obligation arising from an infringement of an intellectual property right shall be the law of the country for which protection is claimed. What does then the phrase “for which protection is claimed” mean? In the case of registered rights, such as patents and trademarks, the article implies that the applicable law shall be the law of the country where they are registered. It is not possible however to apply the same principle to unregistered rights. In the case of unregistered rights it is instead the law of the country where the violation occurred that shall be applied. Copyright is an unregistered right which, according to Swedish law, appears as soon as the work is finished and has reached a certain level of originality. This approach is also applicable in most other countries of the world where copyright law is largely based on the Berne Convention from 1886. The difficulty that courts will face is when someone is claimed guilty of a copyright infringement with a connection to several countries. Given that protection is claimed in the country where the violation occurred, the question will be of which national law that should be applied in these cases. The courts will have to take a position and this paper presents some possible solutions. The essay also discusses if the rules of article 8 of the Rome II-regulation are the best applicable rules in the case of copyright infringement in general.

Le droit international privé de l’Union européenne se réapproprie le problème de la qualification. Non content d’en altérer fondamentalement la configuration, il en réoriente laborieusement la résolution. Or, la qualité du système tout entier, sa stabilité à un instant t, de même que sa capacité à se développer, à s’ouvrir et à se déployer sur le monde extérieur, sont placées dans l’étroite dépendance de l’efficacité de la qualification ; efficacité qui se mesure à l’aune de l’analyse méthodologique de l’opération, comme de la cohérence des résultats auxquels elle conduit. Et si à ce titre le système déçoit aujourd’hui, il est néanmoins tout aussi possible que souhaitable de le refonder rationnellement. Qui peut le plus peut le moins… Exemple sera donc pris de la matière contractuelle, soumise à la règle la plus complexe qui soit, la plus sujette à polémiques aussi, afin d’ouvrir la voie à davantage de cohérence.La reconfiguration du problème de qualification, ayant sa source dans la rupture imposée par le droit de l’Union entre la législation matérielle et la législation conflictuelle, en accentue naturellement la complexité. Curieusement, la construction jurisprudentielle multiplie sans raison les difficultés, imposant deux nouvelles ruptures, entre l’interprétation de la catégorie érigée au fondement de la compétence et l’interprétation du facteur de rattachement d’une part, entre l’opération de qualification et l’opération de coordination des compétences concurrentes d’autre part. La refondation du système de qualification suppose ainsi la combinaison harmonieuse de ce que la jurisprudence a dispersé, qualification, rattachement et coordination concourant conjointement à la détermination de la compétence spéciale, la cohérence des résultats de la qualification déterminant le choix des orientations méthodologiques de l’opération. Dans cette perspective simplificatrice, parce que la complexité des réponses juridiques ne se conçoit que lorsqu’elle reflète adéquatement et efficacement la complexité des questions, il apparaît naturel de confier à l’opération de qualification les moyens de prévenir les difficultés que ne manque pas de susciter sa pratique purement analytique, cause naturelle d’un dépeçage des situations entraînant à son tour une dispersion excessive du contentieux. Appuyé au contraire sur une opération de qualification à visée préventive, et recourant à des catégories plus synthétiques aux contours flexibles, le système de détermination de la compétence spéciale en matière contractuelle gagnerait en simplicité, en efficacité, en adaptabilité, et il pourrait peut-être être envisagé, enfin, de donner une dimension mondiale à ce qui fonctionnerait à l’échelle régionale. / Formally disassociating the sources of material and conflict legislation, European Private International law alters the classical problem of characterisation, resolution of which cannot be borrowed from BARTIN or RABEL theories any longer. Yet, the quality of the whole system, its stability at a given moment, as well as its capacity to develop and to deploy on the outside world, are placed in the narrow dependence of the efficiency of the characterisation process. Analysing this efficiency calls for an examination of the theoretical and methodological implications, as well as of the consistency of the achieved results. On both grounds, the current system of characterisation is undoubtedly disappointing, and should be reconsidered rationally. In this perspective, attention will be focused on “matters relating to contract”, submitted to the more complex and criticized rule of the Brussels I regulation. The importation of a conflict of laws issue within a conflict of jurisdiction reasoning (De Bloos/Tessili) constitutes a terrible factor of complexity, interpretation of the conflict category belonging to the European legal order while the interpretation of the connecting factor is abandoned to the national legal order. As a consequence, the reasons behind the choice of a specific connecting factor simply cannot impact the characterisation process, as the exclusion of all claims formed by third parties from the scope of article 5-1° illustrates (Handte). Moreover, complexity and heterogeneity of situations seem to radically oppose the exercise of adjudicatory authority by a unique jurisdiction other than that of the defendant’s domicile. In such a context, conflicts of litigations are more than frequent and are not always dealt with in a consistent manner. Gubisch, for instance, coerces the very thing Shenavai and Leathertex prohibit, i.e. the exercise of adjudicatory authority by the first judge seized, be it the judge of a secondary obligation. Kalfelis drastically opposes consolidation of parallel proceedings in the event a litigation implies claims founded on different grounds. Observation can thus be made that the Brussels I system currently separates three intellectual operations; characterisation, location of the connecting factor, and coordination of concurring jurisdictions are insulated from each other. Yet, those three operations not only chronologically follow one another, but also functionally pursue the same objective, and characterisation could, and should be provided with the means to anticipate the following difficulties. In this perspective, it is suggested that the dispersive consequences of every conceivable characterisation should constitute the very cause of the definitive and centralising characterisation. In other words, the results’ consistency, as well as the cohesion of the heterogeneous components of the claim should dictate methodological choices. It appears, in turn, that departing from the dogmatic attachment to actor sequitur and prior tempore would enable a well functioning regional system to deploy rationally on worldwide scale.

Pendant longtemps, la qualification lege fori a dominé la scène internationale. D'une conception stricte, témoin d'une analyse particulariste du droit international privé, elle a progressivement évolué vers une conception assouplie. Aujourd'hui, les auteurs s'accordent à voir dans la qualification lege fori, une méthode de qualification appropriée. Confrontée au droit des obligations, la qualification lege fori révèle ses faiblesses. Elle est atteinte d'un vice originel qui implique de s'interroger sur son bien-fondé. Même assouplie, la qualification lege fori est incapable de se détacher des concepts du for. Une situation internationale sera donc résolue selon des concepts dictés pour les besoins du droit interne. Ces insuffisances s'observent à l'étude de cas hybrides. Il s'agit d'hypothèses particulièrement délicates à qualifier car elles se situent à la lisière de la matière contractuelle et de la matière délictuelle. La présente étude se propose de rechercher un modèle de qualification qui puisse répondre à la fonction internationale de la règle à appliquer. À côté de la qualification lege fori, il existe une appréhension européenne de la qualification. Celle-ci s'organise autour de l'élaboration de qualifications autonomes, a priori distinctes de la qualification lege fori. La Cour de justice a ainsi opté pour une qualification autonome des notions de matière contractuelle et de matière délictuelle. Confrontée à la qualification lege fori, la qualification autonome révèle sa véritable nature. Sous certains aspects, elle est une forme de qualification lege fori. Sous un autre angle, elle s'en éloigne et peut être analysée comme une véritable qualification internationale. Contrairement à la qualification lege fori, la qualification autonome répond à la fonction internationale de la règle de droit international privé. Elle est donc adaptée aux besoins de la vie internationale. Une fois le bien-fondé de l'approche autonome posée, il était nécessaire de s'interroger sur sa généralisation. En effet, l'adoption d'un ensemble complet de textes en droit international privé européen des obligations a fait émerger un débat sur l'opportunité d'adopter une qualification unitaire des notions communes aux textes de Bruxelles et de Rome. La présente étude se propose de retenir un modèle autonome et moniste de la qualification borné aux seules relations internationales. / For a long time, the lege fori characterisation has dominated the international scene. It has evolved from a strict conception, witness of a particularistic approach of private international law, towards a more flexible conception. Nowadays, authors accept the lege fori characterisation as an appropriate characterisation method. Faced with the law of obligations, the lege fori characterisation shows its weaknesses. It is suffering from an original defect which prompts interrogations on its merits. Even relaxed, the lege fori characterisation cannot be detached from the concepts of the lex fori. An international situation will therefore be resolved according to concepts dictated based on the needs of the law of the forum. Such inadequacies can be observed when studying hybrid cases. Hybrid cases hypotheses are extremely difficult to classify as they stand on the border between matters relating to tort/delict and matters relating to contracts. The present study will search for a characterisation model able to fulfil the international function of the rule to apply. A European understanding of characterisation exists beside the lege fori characterisation. It revolves around the elaboration of autonomous characterisations, in principle distinct from the lege fori characterisation. The European Court of Justice chose an autonomous characterisation for the notions of matter relating to contract and matter relating to tort/delict. Faced with the lege fori characterisation, the autonomous characterisation reveals its true nature. In some respects, it is a type of lege fori characterisation. From another perspective, it diverges from it and can be interpreted as a true international characterisation. Unlike the lege fori characterisation, the autonomous characterisation fulfils the international function of the private international law rule. Therefore, it is suitable to the needs of international affairs. Once the merits of the autonomous approach have been established, it is necessary to consider whether it can be generalized or not. Indeed, the adoption of a complete set of rules in European private international law relating to contractual and non-contractual obligations highlights a debate on the opportunity to adopt a unitary characterisation for the common notions of the Rome and Brussels Conventions and Regulations. The present study suggests to consider an autonomous and monistic model for characterisation but only to the extent international relations are involved.

European Patents are granted through the European Patent Office. Although such right is unitary, the European patents will break down into a bundle of national patents; each governed by the domestic law of the States which the holder of the right has designated. Since infringement stands in the crossroads between patent enforcement and patent validity, infringement litigation generally touches on the issue of validity as it is impossible to infringe a right that does not exist or no longer exists. The nullity component in infringement litigation gives rise to additional difficulties with respect to the selection of the forum and the applicable law. As a result, the validity challenge is discussed in detail with respect to the application of the relevant rules on international jurisdiction and with respect to the identification of the relevant applicable laws. Cross border litigation in relation to registered intellectual property rights in Europe has been extremely controversial over the years. The jurisdiction of the courts to deal with foreign intellectual property rights is after all not entirely obvious or straightforward in the light of the exclusive jurisdiction provision in the Brussels system. The judgment which the Court of Justice delivered on 13th July 2006 in case Roche and GAT result substantial conflicts. Divergent views had been expressed concerning cross border jurisdiction over intellectual property cases on Article 6(1) of the Brussels I Regulation; and Article 16(4) of the Brussels Convention 1968, what is now Article 22(4) of the Brussels I Regulation. This thesis focuses on the jurisdiction and applicable law on European patent disputes.