Judicial Cooperation in Civil and Commercial Matters After Brexit
Which Way Forward
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9933446 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Giesela Rühl (Friedrich Schiller University Jena, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2018 |
| Volume | 67 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 99-128 |
| Publication date | 2018-01-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International and Comparative Law Quarterly (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0020-5893 • E-ISSN: 1471-6895 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s0020589317000574 |
| OpenAlex | W2782147506 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 4 |
Judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters is generally perceived to be of a rather ‘specialist and technical nature’. However, for the many UK and EU citizens, families and businesses who work, live, travel and do business abroad, the current European framework for choice of law, jurisdiction and recognition and enforcement is of paramount importance. The article, therefore, explores how that framework might look like after Brexit and explores the merits and demerits of the various ways forward. It argues that the best option for both the UK and the EU would be to agree on the continued application of the existing EU instruments or to strive for conclusion of a new agreement that closely replicates these instruments. If no such agreement can be reached the UK should decide to apply the Rome I and Rome II Regulations unilaterally and sign the Lugano Convention of 2007 as well as the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements of 2005
Brexit · Business · Civil procedure · Conflict of laws · Convention · Economics · Enforcement · European union · International trade · Jurisdiction · Law and economics · Political science · Sign (mathematics · Conflict of Laws and Jurisdiction · Corporate Governance and Law · European and International Law Studies · Law
| Citations per year | 0.33 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2023 - 2023 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |