Towards a European Contract Law through Social Dialogue
-
Alex Geert Castermans
Abstract
Suppose the DCFR would be chosen as an optional instrument, will it make business easier? It will not, because of its various references to national law, both of a private and public law nature. It turns out a perilous undertaking to offer private parties a set of rules, by way of an optional instrument, because it is created quite apart from the national private-law and public-law context and it covers only part of the private-law legal relationship. In every single case such a set of rules must be embedded in the applicable national private and public law. An alternative is explored. A European Self regulatory consultation system could provide a framework for drafting model contracts that are tailored to individual sectors. These models should offer terms and conditions that are considered acceptable throughout Europe, with alternatives for Member States having wider or narrower margins.
Résumé
Est-ce que le commerce serait rendu plus facile si le projet de CCR était choisi comme un instrument optionnel? Il est probable que non, en raison des nombreuses références au droit national, à la fois en droit privé et en droit public. C'est dès lors une promesse périlleuse que d'offrir à des parties privées un ensemble de règles par le biais d'un instrument optionnel, car celui-ci est créé de façon assez séparée des droits privés et publics nationaux, et il couvre seulement une partie des relations juridiques de droit privé. Dans chaque cas particulier, un tel ensemble de règles doit être inséré dans les droits nationaux public et privé applicables. Une autre option est explorée. Un système européen de consultation auto-régulateur pourrait fournir un cadre pour élaborer des modèles de contrats qui soient adaptés aux secteurs particuliers. Ces modèles pourraient offrir des clauses et des conditions considérées comme acceptables à travers toute l'Europe avec des options alternatives pour les États membres ayant des marges plus grandes ou plus étroites.
Zusammenfassung
Würde der DCFR als optionales Instrument gewählt, so stellt sich die Frage, ob dies den Geschäftsverkehr erleichtern würde. Die Antwort ist negativ, schon wegen der vielfachen Bezugnahme auf nationales Recht, privates oder auch öffentliches. Es ist ein problembehaftetes Unternehmen, Privatrechtssubjekten ein Regelwerk als optionales Intrument zur Verfügung zu stellen, dass unabhängig vom nationalen Kontext im Privatrecht und öffentlichen Recht ist und das nur einen Teil der Privatrechtsbeziehungen wirklich regelt. Solch ein Regelwerk muss dann in jedem Einzelfall in den nationalen Kontext des privaten und des öffentlichen Rechts eingebettet werden. Der Beitrag untersucht eine Alternative. Ein europäisches selbstregulatorisches Konsultationssystem könnte den Rahmen bilden, innerhalb dessen Modellvertragsbedingungen entwickelt werden, die auf spezifische Sektoren zugeschnitten sind. Diese Modellvertragsbedingungen müssten natürlich als für ganz Europa akzeptabel ausgestaltet werden und zudem innerhalb eines weiter oder enger gesteckten Spielraums auch Alternativen seitens der Mitgliedstaaten zulassen.
Articles in the same Issue
- A Competitive Approach to EU Contract Law
- Choice, Certainty and Diversity: Why More is Less
- The Commission's 2010 Green Paper on European Contract Law: Reflections on Union Competence in Light of the Proposed Options
- European Contract Law Reform and European Consumer Law – Two Related But Distinct Regimes
- A European Civil Law – for Whom and What Should it Include? Reflections on the Scope of Application of a Future European Legal Instrument
- Is the DCFR ready to be adopted as an Optional Instrument?
- The Common Frame of Reference and the Relationship between National Law and European Law
- ‘Good-Bye Harmonisation by Directives, Hello Cross-Border only Regulation?’ – A way forward for EU Consumer Contract Law
- Policy Choices in European Consumer law: Regulation through ‘Targeted Differentiation’
- An Economic Analysis of Harmonization Regimes: Full Harmonization, Minimum Harmonization or Optional Instrument?
- Five political ideas of European contract law
- Green Paper on Policy Options for Progress Towards a European Contract Law for Consumers and Businesses What do we want?
- ‘Choice is good.’ Really?
- An Optional Instrument and Social dumping revisited
- Towards a European Contract Law through Social Dialogue
- General Conclusions
Articles in the same Issue
- A Competitive Approach to EU Contract Law
- Choice, Certainty and Diversity: Why More is Less
- The Commission's 2010 Green Paper on European Contract Law: Reflections on Union Competence in Light of the Proposed Options
- European Contract Law Reform and European Consumer Law – Two Related But Distinct Regimes
- A European Civil Law – for Whom and What Should it Include? Reflections on the Scope of Application of a Future European Legal Instrument
- Is the DCFR ready to be adopted as an Optional Instrument?
- The Common Frame of Reference and the Relationship between National Law and European Law
- ‘Good-Bye Harmonisation by Directives, Hello Cross-Border only Regulation?’ – A way forward for EU Consumer Contract Law
- Policy Choices in European Consumer law: Regulation through ‘Targeted Differentiation’
- An Economic Analysis of Harmonization Regimes: Full Harmonization, Minimum Harmonization or Optional Instrument?
- Five political ideas of European contract law
- Green Paper on Policy Options for Progress Towards a European Contract Law for Consumers and Businesses What do we want?
- ‘Choice is good.’ Really?
- An Optional Instrument and Social dumping revisited
- Towards a European Contract Law through Social Dialogue
- General Conclusions
