The Brussels I Regulation is foremost among the EU private international law instruments, in terms of its heritage and significance in commercial and legal practice in the EU. It has, in the main, worked well.
Dickinson A., (2011) The Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (Recast) (Brussels I bis Regulation), Legal Studies Research Paper No. 11/58, Sydney Law School, last accessed 28 January 2013 at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1930712
In light of the above statement and with a specific focus on commercial matters, critically assess the reasons why and to what effect, the Council, on 6th December 2012, adopted a recast of the Brussels I Regulation (Reg. (EU) 1215/2012) thereby introducing material changes to the Brussels Regime.
With a focus on commercial matters, critically assess the degree of predictability in identifying the applicable law under the rules of the Rome I and Rome II Regulations1 where no valid choice of law is made by the parties. To what degree do these Rome Regulations limit the freedom of choice of parties to choose the applicable law?
1 Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of 17 June 2008 applying to contractual obligations and Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 of 11 July 2007 applying to non-contractual obligations