Search

This article explores the interplay between international arbitration and data subject compensation claims under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The analysis focuses on the validity and enforcement of arbitration agreements and the resulting awards. The article argues that despite potential skepticism, arbitration can offer significant benefits to data subjects, and that compensation claims under the GDPR should be considered arbitrable under the New York Convention and CJEU case law. The article further argues that EU courts have a duty to refer disputes to arbitration, and that the mandatory provisions of EU law have limited means of interfering with this duty. Furthermore, it establishes that the misapplication of GDPR provisions does not automatically justify the denial of arbitral award recognition. The article argues that this is a natural extension of trust traditionally shown to arbitrators, and that such trust should not be easily cast aside.LAN-FR Résumé: Cet article explore l'interaction entre l'arbitrage international et les demandes d'indemnisation en vertu du règlement général sur la protection des données personnelles (RGPD). L'analyse se concentre sur la validité et l'exécution des conventions d'arbitrage et des sentences qui en résultent. L'article affirme qu'en dépit d'un scepticisme potentiel, l'arbitrage peut offrir des avantages significatifs aux personnes concernées, et que les demandes d'indemnisation au titre du RGPD devraient être considérées comme arbitrables en vertu de la Convention de New 216 York et de la jurisprudence de la CJUE. L'article affirme en outre que les tribunaux de l'UE ont le devoir de renvoyer les litiges à l'arbitrage et que les dispositions impératives du droit de l'UE ont des moyens limités d'interférer avec ce devoir. En outre, il établit que la mauvaise application des dispositions du RGPD ne justifie pas automatiquement le refus de reconnaissance de la sentence arbitrale. L'article soutient qu'il s'agit d'une extension naturelle de la confiance traditionnellement accordée aux arbitres, et que cette confiance ne devrait pas être facilement rejetée. Zusammenfassung: Dieser Beitrag untersucht das Zusammenspiel zwischen internationaler Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit und Ansprüchen des Inhabers des informationellen Selbstbestimmungsrechts und der Datenschutzgrundverordnung (DSGV). Dabei fokussiert die Analyse auf Fragen der Wirksamkeit einer Schiedsabrede sowie der darauf gestützten Schiedssprüche. Der Beitrag kommt zum Schluss, dass trotz der verbreitet zu findenden Skepsis Schiedsverfahren dem Inhaber des informationellen Selbstbestimmungsrechts durchaus Vorteile bringen können, und dass daher Ansprüche unter der DSGV für schiedsgerichtsfähig unter der einschlägigen New Yorker Konvention und im EuGH-Fallrecht erklärt werden sollten. Zudem kommt er zum Schluss, dass Gerichte in der EU Streitigkeiten an Schiedsgerichte überweisen müssen und dass dem auch zwingende EU-Normen nicht in signifikantem Maße entgegenstehen. Darüber hinaus wird im Beitrag argumentiert, dass nicht jeder Verstoß gegen die DSGV zwangsläufig zur fehlenden Anerkennungsfähigkeit des Schiedsspruches führt. Vielmehr bezieht der Beitrag die Position, dass das allgemein zum Ausdruck gebrachte Vertrauen der Rechtsordnungen in das Schiedsgerichtswesen auch hier zum Tragen kommen und nicht leicht zur Seite geschoben werden sollte. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article I analyze Kar and Radin's critique of boilerplate text in contract. The problems identified in boilerplate are significant. I then describe the test that they offer to distinguish between proper contract and "pseudo-contract" in boilerplate. The test is constructed upon the use of Gricean Maxims slightly modified for the context of contract law. Next, Karl Llewellyn's test for boilerplate is described. Ultimately, through the use of a couple of examples it is argued that Llewellyn's test is a better option. Even with this result, much of the Kar and Radin critique of boilerplate is significant and valuable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is aimed at illustrating how the traditional idea of "inalienability" of personality rights has been reshaped and transformed by the increasing commodification of corporeal and incorporeal components of identity. Three different legal regimes have recently emerged in Europe: market-inalienability with regard to body rights; limited inalienability rules with regard to personal data; modified contract law applicable to incorporeal components of identity – such as name or likeness – having commercial value. The objective of this paper is to describe each of these models and provide a contribution both to the theory of inalienability and of contract law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Article uses the term patriarchal bargain in order to analyze spousal agreements. In her canonical article Deniz Kandiyoti has coined the term patriarchal bargain in order to describe how women negotiate with patriarchy and strategize under the constraints of male domination. Her seminal work has been highly influential in sociology and gender studies. However, legal scholarship has paid little attention to her work. This Article seeks to bridge this gap and explores how women bargain in the shadow of patriarchy. Using a European courts' decision as an example, this article adds the patriarchal context of spousal agreements. This social context enriches our understanding of spousal agreements and deepens our understanding of contracting under conditions of social inequalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is concerned with the interaction between the principle of equal treatment and non-disclosure agreements in English law. The common use of non-disclosure agreements (also referred to as 'confidentiality clauses' or 'gagging clauses') as a term in contracts settling possible claims in which harassment or discrimination were alleged came to public prominence in England following the #MeToo movement. There has, though, been little consideration of the enforceability of these non-disclosure agreements as a matter of contract law and the impact of non-disclosure agreements upon equality. This paper examines the legal enforceability of these agreements as a matter of English contract law. It is argued that non-disclosure agreements, designed to obtain silence, work to impede the equality of women. English contract law provides few protections from the potential abuse that can arise from non-disclosure agreements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article provides an overview of the most relevant cases decided by the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning contract law. The present issue covers the period between the beginning of June 2021 and the end of December 2021. Out of a total of 329 judgments decided in this period, 55 had a contract law dimension. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article critically engages with Peter Benson's theory of contract law. It explores whether his juridical conception of contract as a transfer of rights, which is governed by the contract law's internal principles of transactional justice, can be reconciled with fundamental rights. The article argues that the conventional distinction between the direct and indirect horizontal effect of fundamental rights is problematic because it does not make it unequivocal which body of law – fundamental rights or contract law – substantially governs the relations between contracting parties and determines the outcome of disputes between them. The answer to this fundamental question, however, is crucial for the stability of Benson's theory of contract law. Drawing on the European experience, the article shows that the relationship between fundamental rights and contract law can take the form of the subordination of contract law to fundamental rights or the complementarity between the two. While the latter is compatible with Benson's theory, the former is in tension with it. For the sake of conceptual clarity, therefore, it is useful to distinguish between three forms of the horizontal effect of fundamental rights in contract law – direct horizontal effect, strong indirect horizontal effect, and weak indirect horizontal effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay raises two challenges to Peter Benson's compelling new account of contract law. First, I argue that Benson's use of the concept of reasonableness goes beyond the Rawlsian account to require that we impute to others a capacity to transcend their contingent circumstances in the context of contractual choice. In fact, our choices in contract are driven by external contingencies and it is only reasonable to take those constrains on other people's choices into account. Second, I contest Benson's related claim that contract law should be, and largely is, content-neutral. I argue to the contrary that the justice of a society depends on the cumulative outcomes from market transactions, and the justice of transactions depends on the justice of the institutional matrix of which transactional law is one part. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Relief or compulsion are the two classes of remedy granted for a breach of contract. Traditionally English law is considered to favour relief-based remedies whilst French law prefer compulsion-based remedies. This article seeks to challenge this orthodoxy through the analysis of relatively recent changes in both jurisdictions regarding enforced performance in kind. More importantly, the influence that performance in kind has on other contractual remedies and clauses must be taken into account. Both contractual damages and penalty clauses are shaped by the availability of enforced performance in kind. Comparing English and French law shows that these two systems are converging which enables lawyers to anticipate the evolution of their respective jurisdictions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2001, the European Commission mooted the idea that contract law should converge in Europe. The idea generated wide-ranging debate about the merits of convergence. The multi-disciplinary nature of this debate has led to important insights, but also conceptual confusion. In this paper, I rely on philosophical tools to clarify key concepts, and identify central issues. In particular, I argue that value pluralism and state sovereignty give rise to the central problem of the legitimacy of the harmonisation project. The issue of legitimacy has not been handled well in the literature. There has been an overly narrow focus on the issue of constitutional legitimacy, or the notion of 'legitimacy as consent'. I attempt to broaden the discussion by considering other accounts of legitimacy. I argue that whichever account is used, the legitimation burden is significant and it is unclear it has been surmounted. Beyond legitimacy, I consider how efficacy considerations seem to militate against convergence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper concerns companies that sell commodities and are in their initial stages of formation and growth. Such companies will often face severe difficulties due to the banking system's unwillingness to finance their activities before they are able to develop sufficient credit histories. When faced with a loss contract, such a company may prefer to breach and litigate simply in order to gain time before having to pay off its debt, thereby preventing immediate insolvency. We have designed a new financial tool to eliminate this incentive to willfully litigate. Under this mechanism, the seller undertakes an obligation to pay a bank the amount of the buyer's damages if the seller does not deliver the good on delivery day in accordance with the contract and law. The bank, in turn, undertakes to pay the buyer the amount of her damages if received by the bank. The effect of this mechanism is to shift the buyer's entitlement to the bank. This increases the seller's cost of willful litigation: if the seller chooses to breach he will prefer paying the buyer's damages to the bank in order to avoid any indication of default on the bank's records, since such an indication will affect his credit rating and access to financial markets in the future. In addition, the mechanism gives the seller an incentive to breach the contract if and only if the contract becomes ex-post inefficient. We also demonstrate ex-ante benefits from the mechanism: by eliminating the risk of willful litigation, established buyers may be willing to raise the contract price, thereby increasing the probability of newcomers' survival. The mechanism also enables the banking system to screen new companies according to their quality, and use their contracts as collateral. Ultimately, this can result in the newcomer achieving financial stability earlier. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rapid expansion of European contract law in the field of consumer financial services gives rise to the question to what extent it is self-sufficient. A self-sufficient European contract law presupposes the existence of an EU-made and EU-enforced contract-related legal order which is largely distinct and independent from national private legal orders. In order to understand to what extent European contract law for consumer financial services reflects this pattern, the author explores the interaction between this supra-national regulatory legal order and traditional national private legal orders, and the consequences of this interplay for the extent of financial consumer protection. The author concludes that the self-sufficiency of European contract law is a matter of degree rather than an absolute; besides, a high degree of its self-sufficiency is not a must for ensuring a high level of consumer protection in financial services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Contract and property law are traditionally seen as rather distinct parts of a legal system. However, there is growing awareness that contract and property are not so separate at all. We can observe more and more fuzzy boundaries. Four examples (case studies) are discussed: reclaiming money, the non-accessory mortgage, protection of mortgagors, private re-registration of mortgages in the US: Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS). The fuzzy boundaries make us realise that the distinction between contract and property (in the classical, 19th century, model of private law: the absence or presence of the binding force of an arrangement on third parties) is becoming less of a binary division and more of a gradual nature. It seems that a growing category of intermediate rights is developing, rights between contract and property law, which may very well prove to have become no longer a dogmatic anomaly, but a necessary supplement to the traditional distinction between contract and property law. If this analysis is correct, it might imply that we have to rethink our categorisation of private law into a law of contract and a law of property, as we had to rethink the categorisation of private law into a law of contract and a law of tort after Gilmore's famous statement that contract law was dead, or at least drowning in a sea of tort. It is not argued that contract law, again, is dead, but that contract law may have begun a new life as part of a broader category of arrangements regarding objects with burdening effect vis-à-vis third parties, where classical contract is one end of the spectrum (no third party effect) and property is the other end of the spectrum (full third party effect). Le droit des contrats et le droit des biens sont traditionnellement perçus comme des parties distinctes d'un système juridique. Cependant, il y a une prise de conscience croissante que le contrat et la propriété ne sont pas du tout si séparés. Nous pouvons observer de plus en plus de frontières floues. Quatre exemples (études de cas) sont discutés: la réclamation d'argent, l'hypothèque non accessoire, la protection des débiteurs hypothécaires, le renouvellement de l'inscription privée des hypothèques aux USA (les systèmes d'enregistrement électronique des hypothèques). Les frontières floues nous font prendre conscience que la distinction entre contrat et propriété (dans le modèle classique de droit privé, c'est-à-dire celui du 19ème siècle: absence ou existence d'un effet obligatoire de l'accord sur les tiers) est en train de devenir d'une nature moins binaire et plus graduelle. Il semble qu'une catégorie croissante de droits intermédiaires soit en train de se développer, des droits entre le droit des contrats et le droit des biens, qui peuvent très bien se révéler n'être plus une anomalie dogmatique, mais un complément nécessaire à la traditionnelle distinction entre droit des contrats et droit des biens. Si cette analyse est correcte, cela pourrait impliquer que nous devions repenser notre catégorisation du droit privé entre un droit des contrats et un droit des biens, comme nous avons eu à repenser la catégorisation du droit privé entre un droit des contrats et un droit de la responsabilité civile délictuelle après la fameuse déclaration de Gilmore selon laquelle le droit des contrats était mort, ou tout au moins se noyait dans une mer de délits. Nous ne nous soutenons pas que le droit des contrats est à nouveau mort mais que le droit des contrats pourrait avoir commencé une vie nouvelle en tant que partie d'une catégorie plus large d'accords portant sur des objets avec des effets obligatoires vis-à-vis des tiers, là où le contrat classique est un bout du spectre (pas d'effets sur les tiers) et la propriété l'autre bout (effet total sur les tiers). Vertrags- und Sachenrecht werden herkömmlich als verschiedene (getrennte) Rechtsgebiete gesehen. Zunehmend wird umgekehrt jedoch erkannt, dass die Trennung keineswegs absolut ist, im Gegenteil. Zunehmend und an vielen Stellen verschwimmen die Grenzen. Vier Fallgruppen werden vorliegend erörtert: die Rückforderung von Geldern, das nicht-akzessorische Grundpfandrecht (Grundschuld), der Schutz von Grundpfandschuldnern, das private Registrierungssystem von Grundpfandrechten in den USA, das Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS). Die Verflüchtigung der klaren Grenzen (im Sinne des klassischen Privatrechts des 19. Jahrhunderts, insbesondere mit dem Credo, dass Verträge keine Dritt-, vor allem keine Drittbindungswirkung entfalten) führt dazu, die genannte Trennung weniger als eine binäre (entweder - oder) zu sehen als vielmehr als ein Kontinuum. Offenbar entwickeln sich stets neue Rechte, die einer Zwischenzone zuzuordnen sind, und diese stellen vielleicht nicht einmal mehr dogmatisch eine Anomalie dar, sondern die sinnvolle Ergänzung der alten Trennung und 'puren' Vertrags- bzw. Sachenrechte. Trifft diese Analyse zu, muss wohl auch die traditionelle Kategorisierung überdacht werden - ähnlich wie die Einteilung des Schuldrechts in Vertragsrecht und Deliktsrecht neu zu denken war nach dem berühmten Beitrag von Gilmore 'Death of Contract', in dem der Vertrag im Meer des Deliktsrechts zu versinken schien. Hier wird nicht vorgeschlagen, dass das Vertragsrecht - wieder - gestorben sei, sondern vielmehr, dass er ein weiteres neues Leben für sich gewonnen hat, als ein Teil eines breiteren Rechts für diejenigen Situationen, in denen Positionen mit Wirkung gegenüber Dritten begründet werden. Hier steht dann der klassische Vertrag an dem einen Ende des Spektrums (ohne Drittwirkungen) und das Eigentum steht am anderen (mit unbeschränkter Drittwirkung). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This section provides an overview of cases in front of the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning contract law. The present issue is an update to that published at p. 204-220 and covers the period between the end of March 2012 and 6 September 2012 as regards judgments and opinions delivered, and the period up to the beginning of August 2012 as regards proceedings initiated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]