An Analysis Of The Brussels I Convention And The Lugano Convention As Integral Aspects Of Harmonization And Unification Of Private International Law
- IJLLR Journal
- Oct 5
- 2 min read
Mathy V Kutty, Law Graduate, Symbiosis Law School, Pune
INTRODUCTION
Private international laws derive their force from domestic legislations. Hence, in a conflict of laws situation, there arises complexity due to such territorial nature of intellectual property rights and the nature of remedies granted in protection of the same. The said difficulties shall be discussed in infringement scenarios with examples of case law. The nature of private international law is that it transcends national boundaries and is derived from each state’s domestic law. It is safe to say that there is no single system of harmonization or unification although in the recent years, there has been progress through the introduction and amendments of various instruments such as Brussels I Recast Regulation, Lugano Convention, Hague Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgements among others. In this context, the author shall specifically address the role played by two significant conventions in the process of harmonization. This is the Brussels I Recast Regulations and the Lugano Convention.
The most important element of private international law in recent years is predictability or legal certainty. This concept entails that the legal rules and regulations are to provide clear and consistent guidelines for individuals and commercial entities that are engaged in cross-border activities. It ensures smooth interoperability, legal certainty, and the seamless functioning of international commerce. Harmonisation and unification is certainly one of the ways to achieve this. Unification refers to the method of prescribing certain standards for states to adopt with respect to private international law, in a horizontal manner. Harmonisation is a concept slightly different from unification in that it is a top-down model that results in the adopting of evolved common and accepted principles or standards into domestic law. This aims to prevent conflicts in the choice of law. There are primarily three steps of harmonisation required. These are synonymous to the steps related to adjudication of private international law disputes i.e., the jurisdiction of a forum to entertain a dispute, choice of law for different aspects of the dispute, and lastly, the recognition and enforcement of judgements.
