Choice of Court Clauses and Lis Pendens under Brussels I Regulation

• Author: Ekaterina Ivanova
• Position: Post graduate student LL.M Business, Corporate and Maritime Law Erasmus University, Erasmus School of Law
• Pages: 12-16

Choice of Court Clauses and Lis Pendens under Brussels I

Regulation

Ekaterina Ivanova

Merkourios - European Contract Law - Vol. 27/71 12

Merkourios 2010 – Volume 27/Issue 71, Article, pp. 12-16.

URN: NBN:NL:UI:10-1-100918

ISSN: 0927-460X

URL: www.merkourios.org

Publisher: Igitur, Utrecht Publishing & Archiving Services

Copyright: this work has been licensed by the Creative Commons Attribution License (3.0)

Keywords

European Contract Law, EC, ECJ, Brussels I, Regulation, Lis Pendens, Litigation, Forum Shopping

Abstract

The principle of party autonomy, known not only in the common law legal system but also in the civil law system, provides

parties contracting in civil and commercial matters with the right to establish their own rules, as long as these r ules do not

contradict mandatory law. This right is presumed to be protected by the force of law. It follows, that when a choice of court

clause is included in the contract, disputes are supposed to be solved by the court chosen by the parties.

This principle is not compromised by the Brussels I Regulation (or previously, the Brussels Convention). Moreover, it is

repeated in its Articles 1 and 23. At the same time, the rule of lis pendens, provided for by its Article 27, aims to preclude

subsequent actions in other Member States if a court is already seized and allows the appearance ‘on the legal scene’ of a

court other than the court chosen by the parties. And the lis pendens r ule prescribes the latter to stay proceedings until the

court not chosen, but rst seized, examines and declines its jurisdiction.

Author Afliations

Post graduate student LL.M Business, Corporate and Maritime Law Erasmus University, Erasmus School of Law

Article