Conflict of Laws
  • About
  • Editorial board
  • Subscription
  • Submission
  • Materials
  • Contact
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu

E-Business Group Website and the Cost of Rome I

April 11, 2007/in /by Martin George
image_pdfimage_print

The E-Business Regulatory Alliance has set up a Rome I E-business Group website to examine the e-business legal issues associated with the current EU proposal on a regulation on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I). [See our posts on Rome I here.] William Roebuck, Legal Policy Director at the E-RA, states:

The Federation of Small Businesses has undertaken research work concerning the costs of the proposal, covering legal fees, translation fees and implementation fees. The total cost of entry per member state is 15,052.59 euros (excluding VAT) for a business to comply with its commitments under Rome I. This amounts to 242,756.00 euros (excluding VAT) for entry to the single market. These figures, together with staff costs will put a significant brake on cross border e-commerce, to the detriment of businesses and consumers. 

We are urging MEPs, the European Council and Member States to rethink this proposal in line with the Commission’s better regulation and i2010 strategies.

Their excellent website can be found here. Many thanks to Will Roebuck for the info.

Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on X
  • Share on WhatsApp
  • Share on Pinterest
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Share on Vk
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Martin George https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Martin George2007-04-11 22:50:032007-04-11 22:50:06E-Business Group Website and the Cost of Rome I

Categories

  • Views
  • News

Most Recent Posts

  • Conflicts of jurisdiction in Senegal: lesson from the Senegalese Supreme Court on Lis Pendens and the Exequatur of foreign judgments July 27, 2026
  • Adoption in the proposal for a European Parenthood Regulation July 21, 2026
  • Copyright, Targeting and Geo-Blocking: The CJEU Stirs the Pot July 15, 2026
  • A Follow-Up: The German Judges Association’s Response to the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions July 15, 2026
  • Private International Law Dimensions of Singapore’s New Legislation to Combat Online Harms July 14, 2026
  • The 1961 HCCH Apostille Convention: Why All African Countries Should Ratify It? — Insights from Judicial Practice in Africa July 14, 2026
  • The enforcement of an advance on costs for substitute performance at the expense of a Russian debtor in German-French legal relations July 2, 2026
  • “Yes, in principle, but not quite there yet…” – Some Observations on the Public Consultation on the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions June 29, 2026
  • Judgment Mobility Rules in India’s Private International Law Regime: No place for a revision au fond? June 26, 2026
  • Nothing to See Here: The CJEU’s Decision in Case C-232/25 Idzinski June 18, 2026
  • Refusal to Enforce in Egypt of a Californian (U.S.) Judgment for Lack of Reciprocity: What Has Gotten into the Egyptian Supreme Court? June 15, 2026
  • PRC Double Interest neither Double nor Penal: Australian Courts Clear Its Name When Enforcing Chinese Judgments June 10, 2026
  • The AIFC Court, Gazprom v Naftogaz and the Emergence of a New Conduit Jurisdiction Debate June 6, 2026
  • Montana Supreme Court Decides International Child Custody Case June 3, 2026
  • China’s Countering Improper Foreign Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Regulation Blocked EU’s Extraterritorial Data Acquisition May 29, 2026
Link to: Lecture on European Private Law at Southampton Link to: Lecture on European Private Law at Southampton Lecture on European Private Law at Southampton Link to: Vol. 3, Issue 1, Journal of Private International Law Link to: Vol. 3, Issue 1, Journal of Private International Law Vol. 3, Issue 1, Journal of Private International Law
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top