Renvoi’s Exclusion in the Hague Principles on Choice of Law in International Commercial Contracts

Keywords: private international law, conflict-of-laws rules, party autonomy, international commercial contract, the Hague Principles on Choice of Law, renvoi, uniformity of decisions

Abstract

The party autonomy is a universal and indisputable principle of modern private international law. According to numerous studies, the vast majority of international commercial contracts include provisions on the choice of law applicable to this agreement. Nevertheless, the doctrinal problems of the conflict-of-laws party autonomy not only do they not disappear, but also continue to multiply, and those aspects of them that have not previously caused controversy are actualized, in particular, the combination of renvoi and the choice of law by the parties to the relationship. Despite its complexity and even controversial nature, the renvoi institute “penetrates” into the acts of lex mercatoria, including those devoted to the party autonomy in international transactions. The Hague Principles on Choice of Law in International Commercial Contracts enshrine article 8 “Exclusion of renvoi”, where the latter seems to be prohibited, but at the same time allowed in specified cases. The article presented examines the question of what does that formulation mean — the prohibition of renvoi or its permission? It is hypothesized that article 8 establishes precisely permission if the parties have explicitly expressed their intention to do so. An overview of various national and international acts containing similar provisions is provided as evidence. In the work, methods of comparative jurisprudence, comparative analysis, contextual interpretation of the law, formal logic, and retrospective analysis were used. It is underlined the fundamental aim of private international law is to achieve justice and international uniformity of decisions, and its successful implementation involves the use of the entire range of conflict-of-laws tools, including the renvoi mechanism. It cannot be argued that renvoi has a detrimental effect on the choice of applicable law, but at the same time it must be remembered that its unrestricted application may violate the reasonable intentions of the parties. However, the functioning of renvoi and the possibility of its harmonious combination with the party autonomy should be considered as a rule, not as an exception.

Author Biographies

Natalia Erpyleva, National Research University Higher School of Economics

Doctor of Sciences (Law), Professor

Irina Getman-Pavlova, National Research University Higher School of Economics

Candidate of Sciences (Law), Associate Professor

Alexandra Kasatkina, National Research University Higher School of Economics

Candidate of Sciences (Law), Associate Professor

References

Bardina M.P. (2017) On the “Norms of Law” in the Hague Principles on Choice of Law in International Commercial Contracts. Consultant Plus (in Russ.)

Born G., Kalelioglu C. (2021) Choice-of-Law Agreements in International Contracts. Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, vol. 50, pp. 44–118.

Briggs A. (1998) In Praise and Defense of Renvoi. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 877–884. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589300062576

Coyle J.F. (2017) The Canons of Construction for Choice-of-Law Clauses. Washington Law Review, vol. 92, pp. 631–712. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2789838

De Aguirre F.C. (2012) Party Autonomy — a Blank Cheque? Uniform Law Review Revue de Droit Uniforme, no. 4, pp. 655–679.

Douglas M., Loadsman N. (2018) The Impact of The Hague Principles on Choice of Law. Melbourne Journal of International Law, vol. 19, pp. 1–23.

Drucker A. (1948) A New Code of Private International Law (Czechoslovakia). The International Law Quarterly, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 473–475.

Estigarribia Gutiérrez H.E. (2017) Aporte desde el Derecho Internacional Privado a la legislación Paraguaya: La Ley Nº 5393/15 “Sobre el derecho aplicable a los contratos internacionales”. Revista de la secretaría del Tribunal permanente de revisión, año 5, no. 9, pp. 280–285. https://doi.org/10.16890/rstpr.a5.n9.p280 DOI: https://doi.org/10.16890/rstpr.a5.n9.p280

Forsyth C. (2010) Certainty versus Uniformity: Renvoi and Movable Property. Journal of Private International Law, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 637–647. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5235/174410410794046297

Gama L.Jr. (2017) Tacit choice of law in the Hague Principles. Uniform Law Review, vol. 22, pp. 336–350. https://doi.org/10.1093/ulr/unx022 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ulr/unx022

Gray A. (2007) The rise of Renvoi in Australia: creating the theoretical framework. University of New South Wales Law Journal, 2007, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 103–126.

Gruson M. (2003) Governing Law Clauses Excluding Principles of Conflict of Laws. International Lawyer, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 1023–1036.

Güngör G. (2008) The Principle of Proximity in Contractual Obligations: The New Turkish Law on Private International Law and International Civil Procedure. Ankara Law Review, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1501/Hukfak_0000000273

Hughes D.A. (2010) The Insolubility of Renvoi and Its Consequences. Journal of Private International Law, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 195–224. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17536235.2010.11424377

Kahn-Freund O. (1974) General Problems of Private International Law. Recueil des cours. Collected Courses. Vol. 143. Académie de Droit International de la Haye, pp. 139–474.

Lhuilier G. (2016) Les principles sur le choix de la loi applicable aux contrats commerciaux internationaux de la Conference de la Haye: l’emergence des «best practices». Revue des affaires internationals, no. 2, pp. 103–108.

Lorenzen E.G. (2018) The Renvoi Doctrine in the Conflict of Laws. Meaning of “The Law of a Country”. The Yale Law Journal, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 509–534. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/786343

Marshall B. (2018) The Hague Choice of Law Principles, CISG, and PICC: A Hard Look at a Choice of Soft Law. American Journal of Comparative Law, vol. 66, pp. 175–217. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcl/avy007

Martiny D. (2015) Die Haager Principles on Choice of Law in International Commercial Contracts: Eine weitere Verankerung der Parteiautonomie. Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht. Bd. 79, S. 624–653. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1628/003372515X14339403063963

Mills A. (2019) Conceptualizing Party Autonomy in Private International Law. Revue critique de droit international privé, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 417–426. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3917/rcdip.192.0417

Monsenepwo J. (2019) Contribution of the Hague Principles on Choice of Law in International Commercial Contracts to the codification of party autonomy under OHADA Law. Journal of Private International Law, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 162–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441048.2019.1593092 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17441048.2019.1593092

Nishitani Y. (2016) Party Autonomy in Contemporary Private International Law — The Hague Principles on Choice of Law and East Asia. Japanese Yearbook of International Law, vol. 59, pp. 300–344.

Ogunranti A. (2017) The Hague Principles — a new dawn for developing countries? Dutch Journal of Private International Law, issue 4, pp. 727–746.

Ruhl G. (2020) Regulatory Competition and the Hague Principles of Choice of Law in International Commercial Contracts. March 13, 2020. 21 p. Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3553808 (date of access: 01.04.2024)

Ruiz Gómez M.A., Villegas Bello R.A. (2020) Estudio comparativo entre la Ley de Derecho Internacional Privado venezolana y la Ley paraguaya sobre el Derecho Aplicable a los Contratos Internacionales. Anuario de la Maestría en Derecho Internacional Privado y Comparado, no. 2, pp. 397–420.

Pauknerová M., Pfeiffer M. (2019) Private International Law in Czech Republic. Alphen Aan den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer, 196 p.

Symeonides S.C. (2007) Oregon’s Choice-of-Law Codification for Contract Conflicts: an Exegesis. Willamette Law Review, vol. 44, pp. 205–288.

Symeonides S.C. (2009) The Conflicts Book of the Louisiana Civil Code: Civilian, American, or Original? Tulane Law Review, vol. 83, pp. 1–36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783866537163.1.1

Tekinalp G. (2007) The 2007 Turkish Code Concerning Private International Law and International Civil Procedure. Yearbook of Private International Law, vol. 9, pp. 313–341. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783866537200.2.313

Tekinalp G., Nome E., Boztosun A.O. (2016) Private International Law in Turkey. Alphen Aan den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer, 224 p.

Tsareva L. (2016) The Hague principles of choice of law in international commercial contracts: scope of application and main provisions. Justitcia Belarusi=Justice of Belarus, vol. 4, pp. 1–4 (in Russ.)

Yaşar T.N. (2013) Türk mahkemelerinde yabanci hukukun uygulanmasi. Türk Mahkemelerinde Yabancı Hukukun Uygulanması=Application of Foreign Law in the Courts of Turkey. Public and Private International Law Bulletin, vol. 33, iss. 2, pp. 75–114 (in Turkish)

Zykin I.S. (2016) The Hague principles on Choice of Law in International Commercial Contracts. In: Legal Aspects of Modern Practice of International Commercial Turnover: collection of papers. Moscow: Statut, pp. 73–92 (in Russ.)

Published
2024-09-04
How to Cite
ErpylevaN., Getman-PavlovaI., & KasatkinaA. (2024). Renvoi’s Exclusion in the Hague Principles on Choice of Law in International Commercial Contracts. Law Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 17(3), 212-238. https://doi.org/10.17323/2072-8166.2024.3.212.238