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

Tag Archive for: Rome I Regulation

‘Paramount clause’ in a bill of lading as choice of law under Rome I – the Supreme Court of the Netherlands in Airgas USA v Universal Africa Lines

November 10, 2025/in Views/by Ekaterina Pannebakker

 

In Airgas USA v Universal Africa Lines (7/11/2025, ECLI:NL:HR:2025:1665), the Supreme Court of the Netherlands considered the interpretation of a so-called ‘Paramount clause’ in a bill of lading. Such clauses commonly signpost which rules govern the international carriage of goods by sea. The Court addressed such clause as a choice of law and held that article 3(1) of the Rome I Regulation does not preclude the parties from agreeing on such clause. Read more

https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Ekaterina Pannebakker https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Ekaterina Pannebakker2025-11-10 19:07:132025-12-06 14:29:12‘Paramount clause’ in a bill of lading as choice of law under Rome I – the Supreme Court of the Netherlands in Airgas USA v Universal Africa Lines

Call for Participants: Quo Vadis Preferential Law Approach? A Survey on the Interpretation of Article 6(2) Rome I Regulation Across EU Member States

February 14, 2025/3 Comments/in News/by Tobias Lutzi

Benedikt Schmitz (University of Groningen) has shared the following call for participants with us:

Quo Vadis Preferential Law Approach? A Survey on the Interpretation of Article 6(2) Rome I Regulation Across EU Member States

Project description:

The Rome I Regulation plays a crucial role in determining the applicable law in cross-border consumer contracts within the European Union. Article 6(2) Rome I Regulation allows parties to choose the governing law while ensuring that consumers do not lose the protection granted by mandatory provisions of the law that would apply in the absence of such a choice. Despite its significance, the interpretation of this provision varies across Member States, leading to questions about its practical coherence and effectiveness. Read more

https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Tobias Lutzi https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Tobias Lutzi2025-02-14 16:35:382025-02-16 09:01:10Call for Participants: Quo Vadis Preferential Law Approach? A Survey on the Interpretation of Article 6(2) Rome I Regulation Across EU Member States

French Supreme Court ruling in the Lafarge case: the private international law side of transnational criminal litigations

February 13, 2024/3 Comments/in Views/by Etienne Farnoux

Written by Hadrien Pauchard (assistant researcher at Sciences Po Law School)

In the Lafarge case (Cass. Crim., 16 janvier 2024, n°22-83.681, available here), the French Cour de cassation (chambre criminelle) recently rendered a ruling on some criminal charges against the French major cement manufacturer for its activities in Syria during the civil war. The decision addresses several key aspects of private international law in transnational criminal lawsuits and labour law.

Read more

https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Etienne Farnoux https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Etienne Farnoux2024-02-13 13:58:072024-02-14 14:43:18French Supreme Court ruling in the Lafarge case: the private international law side of transnational criminal litigations

BOOK REVIEW OF THE EUROPEAN PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW OF OBLIGATIONS

December 22, 2023/in News/by Chukwuma Okoli

EDITED

Sweet & Maxwell is offering a 15% discount on all orders of the book until January 31st 2024. To receive your discount on purchases of the hardback and ProView eBook versions of The European Private International Law of Obligations please visit Sweet & Maxwell’s estore and quote the discount code EPILOO23 at checkout OR call +44 (0)345 600 9355. Offer valid from 22nd December to 31st January 2024. 

 

European Private International Law of Obligations, The

Read more

https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Chukwuma Okoli https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Chukwuma Okoli2023-12-22 07:37:112023-12-29 11:46:52BOOK REVIEW OF THE EUROPEAN PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW OF OBLIGATIONS

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
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top