The Société de législation comparée has published a liber amicorum in honour of Professor Iacyr de Aguilar Vieira entitled (in French): Études en l’honneur du Professeur Iacyr de Aguilar Vieira. This book has been coordinated/compiled by Gustavo Cerqueira and Gustavo Tepedino. More information is available here.
This book may be purchased by clicking here (and here). A more favorable price is available until 8 April 2021. Those who acquire the book now (by way of a “souscription”) may consent to having their name appear at the end of the book.
Contributions are written in French, English, Italian and Spanish and range from commercial law to private international law to law and literature. Please find below the details as announced:
Droit civil, droit des affaires, droit international privé, droit privé comparé, droit du commerce international, littérature et droit, constituent autant de champs d’étude que des passions pour Iacyr de Aguilar Vieira durant son intense et fructueuse activité de recherche et d’enseignement au Brésil comme en Europe.
C’est dans ces domaines que ses élèves, collègues et amis, européens et sud-américains, rendent aujourd’hui un hommage amical à cette universitaire empreinte de liberté.
Arnoldo Wald, Lettre-préface en hommage au Professeur Iacyr de Aguilar Vieira
Danièle Alexandre, Témoignage d’une amitié franco-brésilienne
I – Droit civil et droit des affaires
Guido Alpa, L’applicazione diretta dei diritti fondamentali ai rapporti fra privati
Margarida Azevedo, The evolution of the concept of contractual justice
Rodrigo Octávio Broglia Mendes, Notes on the concept of “economy of the contract”
Geoffray Brunaux, Efficacité et effectivité de la réglementation des activités du commerce électronique
Diogo Leite de Campos, Mónica Martinez de Campos, Le logement familial : (in)saisissable ?
Estelle Fragu, Fernanda Sabrinni, L’imprévu dans le contrat
Laurent Gamet, Les avocats et l’intelligence artificielle. Des outils et des hommes
Nicolas Kilgus, Le droit réel sui generis : entre perspectives et interrogations
Giovanni Lobrano, Dai “mezzi per difendere la libertà” ai modi di costituirla. Per “sbloccare” la dottrina giuridica
Kevin Magnier-Merran, Observations sur la délimitation des usages
Marc Mignot, Le corpus jurisprudentiel issu de l’ordonnance n° 45-770 du 21 avril 1945 sur la nullité des actes de spoliation accomplis par l’ennemi ou sous son contrôle et édictant la restitution aux victimes
Pierre Mousseron, Bernard Laurent-Bellue, Pour un Droit coutumier des sociétés
Cyril Noblot, Clause compromissoire et clause de conciliation préalable obligatoire : exercice de droit comparé interne français
Fabrice Rosa, Le pouvoir de réglementation des personnes privées dans la théorie générale des obligations en droit français
Antonio Saccoccio, Mutuo real, acuerdo de mutuo y promesa de mutuo en derecho romano
Anderson Schreiber, Pour le dépassement de la théorie de l’imprévision (en faveur de l’équilibre contractuel in concreto)
Michel Storck, Les agences de conseil en vote : à la recherche d’une régulation
Gustavo Tepedino, L’efficacia dei diritti fondamentali nelle associazioni: la costituzionalità dei criteri di ammissione differenziati nell’esperienza brasiliana
II – Droit international
Renaud Alméras, Réflexion sur le contrôle par le juge français des décisions étrangères de saisie pénale
Andrea Bonomi, Recognition of foreign judgments in Brazil: some comparative law remarks also in light of the 2019 Hague Judgment Convention
Jamile Bergamachine Mata Diz, Pedro Campos Araújo Corgozinho, La qualification et le caractère dynamique des biens en droit international privé brésilien
Gustavo Ferraz de Campos Monaco, Mobilité de personnes et droit international privé : un regard brésilien
Claudia Lima Marques, Pablo Marcello Baquero, Gouvernance mondiale et droit de la consommation
Fernanda Munschy, Autonomie de la volonté en Amérique Latine : 27 ans après l’adoption de la Convention de Mexico sur la loi applicable aux contrats internationaux
Nicolas Nord, La reconstruction des règles de conflit relatives au contrat de travail international. Etude du droit européen à l’aune des incohérences jurisprudentielles
Naiara Posenato, On the formation of the electio iuris agreement: some comparative insights
Camille Reitzer, Qualification et méthode de la reconnaissance
Carmen Tiburcio, Choice of court agreements : a comparative analysis
Alan Wruck Garcia Rangel, Échanges épistolaires en droit international privé : les consultations juridiques de José Carlos de Almeida Arêas dans les dernières décennies du XIXe siècle
III – Droit privé comparé et droit du commerce international
Olivier Cachard, La méthode comparatiste et l’hybridation des droits. L’exemple de la lex Schuman lors du recouvrement de l’Alsace et de la Moselle.
Andreia Costa Vieira, Sustainable foreign direct investments for emerging and developing countries
Milena Donato Oliva, Pablo Renteria, Filipe Medon, La protection des données personnelles au Brésil et en Europe
José Angelo Estrella Faria, Competition among legal systems: the influence of rankings in stimulating commercial law reform
Franco Ferrari, Friedrich Rosenfeld, Les limites à l’autonomie des parties en matière d’arbitrage international
Ana Gerdau de Borja Mercereau, Responsabilité sociale de l’entreprise et l’arbitrage d’investissement
Anne Gilson-Maes, La famille et le contrat en droit français – Analyse à la lumière du droit comparé
Carlos Nelson Konder, Tramonto o revirement della causa del contratto: Influenze europee sul diritto brasiliano
Sabrina Lanni, Imprevisión contrattuale: esperienze latinoamericane e armonizzazione del diritto
Andrea Marighetto, La clausola della buona fede nel commercio internazionale. Natura giuridica e profili comparatistici occidentali
José Antonio Moreno Rodrígues, International Sales Law and Arbitration
Magalie Nord-Wagner, Le droit et la quête du bonheur en droit comparé
Francisco Pignatta, La nouvelle loi de protection des données au Brésil : le RGPD comme référence et les difficultés de sa mise en œuvre
Marilda Rosado de Sá Ribeiro, Fernanda Torres Volpon, Ely Caetano Xavier Junior, Contrats internationaux complexes et la responsabilité civile précontractuelle dans une perspective comparative
Claude Witz, Influences de la Convention de Vienne sur le législateur français
IV – Droit et littérature
Luiz Felipe Araújo, The Lost Pathos of Rhetoric: human being, power and affections on Law in Friedrich Nietzsche
Gustavo Cerqueira, Pour un dictionnaire juridique de notions et de phénomènes contemporains
Arnaud Coutant, Aux origines du mouvement droit et littérature, le Professeur John Henry Wigmore
Thibault de Ravel d’Esclapon, Molière et le droit. À propos de Scapin, de ses fourberies et de la justice
Emilien Rhinn, La littérature au service d’un idéal politique : nationalisme français et femmes alsaciennes-lorraines (1871-1918)
Nunziata Valenza Paiva, Il diritto nei confronti delle favole : il contributo della letteratura nella costruzione della base morale, civica e giuridica dei bambini
In a judgement dated 18 November 2020, the French Supreme Court for private and criminal matters (Cour de cassation) ruled that the obligation to apply choice of law rules equally applies in interim proceedings. In contrast, the court had ruled in 1996 that French courts did not have the power to apply choice of law rules in interim proceedings.
BackgroundThe case was concerned with a traffic accident which had occurred in Italy. A car driven by a French woman had run over a professional Australian cyclist living in Monte Carlo (which one is anyone’s guess). The victim initiated interim proceedings in France against the driver and her insurer seeking the appointment of a judicial expert and a provisional payment order.
Various provisions of the French Code of Civil Procedure grant French courts the power to issue provisional payment orders (référé provision) where a claim cannot be “seriously disputed”. Such orders may be granted in interim proceedings for up to 100% of the claim. They are not final, and in theory the defendant may always reopen the issue in the proceedings on the merits. In practice, defendants often do not bother and provisional payment orders are never challenged.
The issue in this case was whether the French court had the power, and indeed the duty, to apply French choice of law rules and, as the case may be, assess whether the claim was undisputable be reference to the law governing the substantive rights.
Applicable LawThe case was clearly concerned with a tort claim. In many Member states, the Rome II Regulation would have applied, but France is a party to the 1971 Hague Convention on the law applicable to traffic accidents. Pursuant to Article 28 of the Rome II Regulation, the Regulation does not affect the application of the 1971 Convention because it also applies in third states (Switzerland, Morocco, Ukraine, etc…).
The Hague Convention is of universal application, and it thus applied in French courts irrespective of the fact that the accident occurred in a third state, and designated the law of a third state. The choice of law rules of the Convention are pretty complex, and include a number of exceptions to the application of the law of the place of the accident, in particular where the car was matriculated, and the victim was outside the vehicle and resided, in the same country (art. 4), but that was not the case here. So Italian law likely applied as the law of the place of the accident (Article 3).
However, maybe because it had limited knowledge of private international law or, more likely, because it had no intention of applying Italian law, the court of appeal of Aix en Provence applied the Rome II Regulation and found that the exception clause in Article 4(3) allowed for the conclusion that French law was manifestely more connected to the tort.
The Cour de cassation did not even bother to comment on the application of the exception clause. It set aside the judgment of the court of appeal on the ground that it had applied the wrong choice of law rule, as it had failed to apply the Hague Convention.
Most importantly, it held that the court of appeal had the duty to apply the Hague Convention to determine the applicable law, “even in interim proceedings” (“même statuant en référé“).
Substance and ProcedureAlthough the judgment of the Cour de cassation is concise, its meaning is clear.
It is not that foreign law might be applied to procedure or to determine which provisional measures might be available. This is governed by the law of the forum. So, the availability of the two provisional measures sought by the victim was entirely governed by French law, and so were the requirements for granting them. French law provided that provisional payment orders could only be granted if the claim could not seriously be disputed.
Many provisional measures, however, aim at protecting and anticipating substantive rights. Freezing orders protect the payment of a claim. Under French law, a provisional payment order anticipates the payment of a claim. The issue was whether the existence of such claim should also be assessed in accordance with the law of the forum, or whether it should be assessed in accordance with the law governing the relevant claim. The Cour de cassation rightly holds that it should be in accordance with the law governing the relevant claim.
AssessmentThe judgment is right. There is no acceptable alternative to the application of the law governing the claim. If the law of the forum is applied, the resulting measures will protect imaginery rights. Another possibility would be to rule that, as foreign law cannot be applied in interim proceedings, the application should be dismissed where the law of the forum does not apply. For protective measures at least, this would border denial of justice. But this was the outcome of the 1996 judgment of the Cour de cassation where it was held that French courts did not have the power to apply choice of law rules to determine whether the creditor seeking a freezing order had a good arguable case, and the application denied.
Of course, time is typically of the essence in interim proceedings. The establishment of foreign law may then raise difficulties. But the establishment of facts raises the same difficulties. For certain proctective measures such as freezing orders, the answer is to lower the standard of proof. It is possible to do the exact same for establishing foreign law. German courts have so held in several cases: only the likelihood of the content of foreign law should be established at that stage.
For other provisional measures, the standard of proof is high, if not higher. This is the case for establishing that a claim cannot be seriously disputed under French civil procedure. But such measures are not urgent, and it would not be a denial of justice to deny the remedy and to await for the outcome of the proceedings on the merits.
Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer