Jurisdiction agreements under the Brussels I regulation and the 2005 Hugue convention on choice of court agreement

Abstract

Legal certainty and party autonomy form the basis of the Brussels I Regulation which provides the rules on jurisdiction for European cross-border litigation. The ability of parties to regulate their relationship within international contracts is demonstrated in the Brussels I Regulation through the Articles on the prorogation on jurisdiction. By virtue of Article 23 of Regulation 44/2001, parties could designate a court of their choice to possess jurisdiction for the settlement of their disputes. This thesis examines the effects produced by an agreement on jurisdiction under the system of Regulation 44/2001 and the interpretation of the rules established in Article 23 of Regulation 44/2001 by the Court of Justice of the European Union and the national courts. To enhance the respect for the autonomy of the parties and provide a more unified system within the European Union, the European legislator initiated discussions for a revision of the Regulation including the rules on choice of forum agreements. Regulation 1215/2012 of 12 December 2012 contains the newly adopted provisions on the Union's rules on jurisdiction. The Articles of this Regulation reflect the compromise that has been agreed by the Member States. This thesis will also analyse the effects that the changes introduced by Regulation 1215/2012 will have on jurisdiction agreements within the scope of the Brussels I Regulation. The amendments to Regulation 44/2001 will also be examined in the light of the 2005 Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements which has been signed by the European Union in 2009. This Convention is also intended to give parties in international transactions the confidence to enter into agreements that will be respected by the Contracting States.