Party Autonomy in International Property Law - Peace Palace Library

1. Choice of Law in International Property Law
14 of the Rome I Regulation, but instead has been deliberately set aside. 24
However, this view is not consistent with the wording and codifying aim
of Article 14 of the Rome I Regulation. 25 One of the most important
aspects of the international assignment of claims could not remain unregulated,
and the wording of the provision concerned in its paragraph
1 and also the recital therewith 26 suggest the interpretation that the disposal
effect of the assignment and encumbrance of a claim is completely
regulated by the provision. It was also possible to show that the provision
with this understanding is workable in practice. 27
C. Intermediate findings
The statements made in the more recent academic and legislative texts
from other countries in Europe can be summarised as follows:
Firstly, choice of law by the parties may supplant the ‘objective’ connecting
factors, where the location of the property becomes indistinct (export
goods, goods in transit), is unknown (assets gone missing) or does not
exist (claims). 28 The freedom to choose the legal system has been made
law here, although in these cases an ‘objective’ substitute reference is
frequently possible and recommended (country of destination, country
where the property went missing) 29 or (for the assignment of a claim)
24
F. Bauer, Die Forderungsabtretung im IPR (2008) 103 et seq., 167, 301; Kieninger,
Die Vereinheitlichung des Kollisionsrechts der Abtretung, in: Basedow / ​
Remien / ​Wenckstern (eds.), Europäisches Kreditsicherungsrecht – Symposium
Drobnig (2010) 149-159.
25
For more information: Flessner, Die internationale Forderungsabtretung nach
der Rom I-Verordnung, IPRax 2009, 35, 38 et seq., and in this book, p. 207-224.
26
Recital 38 of the preamble to the Regulation.
27
In detail: Flessner, Rechtswahlfreiheit auf Probe – Zur Überprüfung von Art
14 der Rom I-Verordnung, in: Festschrift Kühne (2009) 687-699.
28
According to the Dutch Act and Article 14 Rome I Regulation.
29
Overview: Verschraegen in Rummel, ABGB II 3d ed., § 31 IPRG nr. 36-38;
Schwind, Internationales Privatrecht (1990) nr. 396-398; Wendehorst in
MünchKomm BGB X, EGBG 4th ed., Article 46 nr. 32-44; Kropholler, Internationales
Privatrecht, 6th ed. (2006) § 54 IV, V; von Hoffmann / ​Thorn, IPR
9th ed. § 12 nr. 36-42; Rauscher, Internationales Privatrecht, 3d ed. (2006)
nr. 1466.
Axel Flessner
19
© sellier. european law publishers
www.sellier.de