Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Optional (Facultative) Choice of Law? Reflections from a Dutch Perspective

  • Published:
Netherlands International Law Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. See, in Switzerland and Germany, e.g., A. Flessner, ‘Fakultatives Kollisionsrecht’, 34 Rabebs Zeitsehrift (1970) pp. 547–584; S. Simitis,‘ Ober die Entscheidungsfindung im internationalen Privafrecht’, 29 Das Standesamt (1976) pp. 6–15; P. Lalive, ‘Tendances et méthodes en droit international privé, 155 Recueil des cours (1977–II) pp. 1424 at pp. 158 et seq.; K. Schurig, Kollisionsnorm and Saehreeht (Berlin, Duncker & Humblot 1981) pp. 343–350; P. Sturm, ‘Fakultatives Kolfisionsrecht: Notwendigkeit and Grenzen’, in H. Bernstein, et al., eds., Festschrift für Konrad Zweigertzum 70. Geburtstag (Tubingen, Mohr Siebeck 1981) pp. 329–351; A.E. von Overbeck, ‘La theme des “regles de conflit facultatives” et f autonomie de la volonté, in P. Böckli, et al., eds., Festschrift für Frank Vischer zum 60. Geburtstag (Zurich, Schulthess Polygraphischer Verlag 1983) pp. 257–262; P.-C. Muller-Graff, ‘Fakultatives Kollisionsrecht im internationalen Wettbewerbsrecht?’, 48 Rabels Zeitschrift (1984) pp. 289–318; A. Flessner, Interessenjurisprudenz im Internatonalen Privatreeht (Tubingen, Mohr Siebeck 1990) pp. 119–125; D. Koemer, Fakultatives Kollisionsrecht in Frankreich and Deutschland (Tubingen, Mohr Siebeck 1995); D. Reichert-Facifides, Fakultatives and zwingendes Kollisionsrecht (Tubingen, Mohr Siebeck 1995); K. Schurig, ‘Interessenjurisprudenz contra Interessenjurisprudenz im IPR. Anmerkungen zu Flessners Thesen’, 59 Rabels Zeitschrift (1995) pp. 229–244; D. Einsele, ‘Rechtswahlfreiheit im Internationalen Privatrecht, 60 Rabels Zeitschrift (1996) pp. 417447 at pp. 419421; G. Wagner, ‘Fakultatives Kollisionsrecht and prozessuale Parteiautonomie’, 7 Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht (1999) pp. 646; O. Hartenstein, Die Privatautonomie im Internationalen Privatrecht als Störung des europäischen Entscheidungseinklangs (Tubingen, Mohr Siebeck 2000); idem, ‘Neues vom fakultativen Kollisionsrecht in Frankreich: Die verschlungenen Pfade der Cour de cassation’, 21 Praxis des Internationalen Privat and Verfahrensreehts (IPRax) (2001) pp. 477481; C. von Bar and P. Mankowski, Internationales Privatreeht. Band L Allgemeine Lehren, 2nd edn. (Munich, Verlag C.H. Beck 2003) pp. 393 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  2. See, in France, more recently, H. Muir Watt in her annotation of two decisions of the Cour de cassation of 26 May 1999, Revue critique de droit international privé 1999, pp. 707 et seq. and B. Fauvarque-Cosson, ‘Le juge français et le droit stranger’, Recueil Dalloz (2000-1) pp. 125–134. Both articles include further references to French literature and case law.

  3. See for a further distinction between the so-called ‘geriehtsfakultatives Kollisionsrecht’ and ‘parteifakultatives Kollisionsrecht’ e.g., Wagner, loc. cit. n. 1, at p. 20 and Hartenstein 2001, loc. cit. n. 1, at pp. 478–479.

    Google Scholar 

  4. See infra section 3.

  5. Th.M. de Boer, ‘Facultative Choice of Law. The Procedural Status of Choice-of-law Rules and Foreign Law’, in 257 Recued des cours (1996) pp. 225–427. His preference for an optional choice of law already became apparent in his contribution in R.C. Gisolf, Kort geding en rechter. Inleiding tot het kort gediug, geschreven vanuit de rechtszaal (Zwolle, Tjeenk Willink 1993) pp. 79–97. However, in 1979, De Boer was st ll an advocate of the mandatory application of choice of law rules in his essay ‘Buitenlands recht onder de loep. Problemen rond de toepassing van vreemd recht’, in Th.M. Bervoets, et al, eds., Hoe vreemd is buitenlands recht? Opstellen over de positie van buitenlands recht in het burgerlijk proces (Deventer, Kluwer 1979) pp. 9–37 at pp. 31–33.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Staats commissie voor bet Internationaal Privamrecht, Advies omtrent en voorstel voor een wettelyke regeling houdende Algemene Bepalingen van de Wet op het internationaal privaatrecht, The Hague 1 June 2002 (published at 〈http://www.justitie.nl/themas/wetgeving/rapporten en now/ privamrecht/stamscommissie ipr.asp〉). This proposal contains articles on, inter alia, the preliminary question, general issues of nationality (multiple nationality, stateless persons and refugees), renvoi, priority rules, fait accompli, a general and a public policy exception and the formal validity of legal acts. See on this proposal the special issue of the journal Weekblad voor Privaatrecht, Notariaat en Registra6e (WPNR) nr. 6537 (2003) pp. 443491; P. Vlas, ‘De codificatie van bet Nederlandse IPR’, Pijdschrift@apr.be/Revue@dipr.be (2004) pp. 106–114 (published at 〈http://www.ipr.be〉); the various essays in R. Kotting, J.A. Pontier and L. Strikwerda, Voorkeur voor de lex fori. Symposium ter gelegenheid van het afscheid van Prof.mr. Th.M de Boer (Deventer, Kluwer 2004).

  7. According to Art. 2 of the proposal, the Dutch court, have to apply the choice of law rules, as well as the applicable foreign law, of their own motion.

  8. See, on this issue, also L. Strikwerda, ‘Naar een facultatief conflictenrecbt?’, 72 Nederlands Juristenblad (NJB) (1997) pp. 1970–1971; H. Boonk, Zeerecht en IPR (Kluwer, Deventer 1998) pp. 21–73; X.E. Kramer, Het kort geding in internationaal perspectief (Deventer, Kluwer 2001) pp. 271–330; L.ThL.G. Pellis, ‘Ambtshalve toepassing van recht: Daag de wetgever an nu bet nog kanl’, WPNR nr. 6537 (2003) pp. 449454.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Somewhat differently with regard to the application of choice of law rules by the registrar see Th.M. de Boer, ‘Facultative Choice of Law in Extrajudicial Proceedings’, in J.-F. Gerkens, et al., eds., Melanges Friz Sturm, offsets par ses collegues et ses anus d l’occasion de son soixante-dixieme anniversaire, Vol. 11 (Liege, Editions Juridiques de l’Universite de Liege 1999) pp. 1409–1424 at pp. 1417 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  10. See also De Boer 1996, op. cit. n. 5, at pp. 330 et seq., pp. 352 et seq., pp. 359 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  11. See also, e.g., H. Schack, ‘Keine stillschweigende Recht wahl im Prozess!’, 6 IP Rax (1986) pp. 272–274; P.M.M. Mostermans, De processuele behandeling van het confiictenrecht (Deventer, Tjeenk Willink 1996) pp. 114 et seq.; P. Hay and G. Hampe, ‘Nichtermittelbarkeit auslandischen Rechts and Forum Non Conveniens’, 44 Recht der Internationalen Wirtschaft (RIW) (1998) pp. 760–765 at pp. 762–763, 765; Hartenstein 2000, op. cit. n. 1, at pp. 114 et seq.; idem 2001, loc. cit. n. 1, at p. 481; Von Bar and Mankowski, op. cit. n. 1, at p. 397.

    Google Scholar 

  12. See, among others, also T.C. Hardey, ‘Pleading and Proof of Foreign Law: the Major European Systems Compared’, 45 ICLQ (1996) pp. 271–292; S. Geeroms, Foreign Law in Civil Litigation. A Comparative and Functional Analysis (Oxford, Oxford University Press 2003) pp. 41 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  13. HR 4 June 1915, NJ 1915, p. 865, W9871 (note by Meijers); HR 8 April 1927, NJ 1927, p. 1110 (note by Scholten); HR 20 March 1931, NJ 1931, p. 890 (note by Scholten); HR 15 April 1983, NJ 1983, 698 (note by Schultsz); HR 23 February 2001, NJ 2001, 431 (note by De Boer/ Vranken). See also Mostemans, op. cit. n. 11, at pp. 34 et seq.

  14. See, among others, H.U. Jessurun d’Oliveira, ‘Foreign Law in Summary Proceedings (Kort Geding)’, in M. Sumampouw, et al., eds., Law and Reality, Essays on National and International Procedural Law in Honour of C.C.A. Poskud (Dordrecht, Maximus Nijhoff Publishers 1992) pp. 119–135; Mostermans, op. cit. n. 11, at pp. 51–57; G.E. Schmidt, ‘Het toepasselijk recht in kort geding’, in G.E. Schmidt, ed., Studiedag IPR & Kort Geding (The Hague, T.M.C. Asset Press 2000) pp. 5–18 and pp. 67–75; Kramer, op. cit. n. 8, at pp. 271–330. However, critical in this respect De Boer 1993, op. cit. n. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. Erauw, Handboek Belgisch Internationaal Privaatrecht 2001–2002, under: ‘Toepassen vreemde wet’, as published at 〈http://www.ipr.be〉; Geeroms, op. cit. n. 12, at pp. 54 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  16. BGH 7 April 1993, NJW 1993, p. 2305; BGH 6 March 1995, NJW 1995, p. 2097; BGH 21 September 1995, NJW 1996, p. 54; BGH 25 September 1997, IP Rax 1999, p. 45; Von Bar and Mankowski, op cit. n. 1, at pp. 391 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Corte di Cassazione 16 February 1966, Giurisprudenza italiana 1966 I/1, p. 1402; Hartenstein 2000, op. cit. n. 1, at pp. 41–42.

  18. Arts. 2 and 3 of the Austrian Private International Law Act.

  19. Art. 12, sub 6, first paragraph of the Introductory Tide of the Spanish Civil Code. See also F. Outran Sobrino, ‘Der Beweis des auslandischen Rechts in der neuen spanischen Zivilprozessordnung vom 7. Januar 2000: Chronik einer Emuchterung’, in J. Basedow, et al, eds., Aufbruch each Europa. 75 Jahre Max-Planck-Institut für Privatrecht (Tubingen, Mohr Siebeck 2001) pp. 685–703 at pp. 687–688.

    Google Scholar 

  20. K. Siehr, Des Internationale Privatrecht der Schweiz (Zurich, Schulthess 2002) pp. 574–575.

    Google Scholar 

  21. L. Collins, et al, Dicey and Morris on The Conflict of Laws, Vol. I (London, Sweet & Maxwell 2000) pp. 221 et seq. See also R. Fentiman, Foreign Law in English Courts. Pleading, Proof and Choice of Law (Oxford, Oxford University Press 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Cour de cessation 26 May 1999 in the cases Société Mutuelle du Mans and Mme Elkhbizi, Revue critique de droit international privé 1999, pp. 707 et seq. See, on previous case law, among others, H. Muir Watt in her annotation of the decisions of the Cone de cessation of 26 May 1999, in Revue critique de droit international privE 1999, pp. 707 et seq., as well as Hartenstein 2001, loc. cit. n. 1, at pp. 477 et seq. and Geeroms, op. cit. n. 12, at pp. 60 et seq.

  23. HR 4 June 1915, NJ 1915, p. 865, W9871 (note by Meijers); HR 20 March 1931, NJ 1931, p. 890 (note by Scholten); HR 9 November 1990, NJ 1992, 212 (note by Kleijn); HR 22 February 2002, NJ 2003, 483 (note by Vlas). See, also, Mostermans, op. cit. n. 11, at pp. 57 et seq.

  24. The European Convention on Information on Foreign Law of 7 June 1968, CETS No. 062, was concluded in London under the auspices of the Council of Europe. See, more recently, B.J. Rodger and J. van Doom, ‘Proof of Foreign Law: The Impact of the London Convention’, 46 ICLQ (1997) pp. 151–173 with further references. At the present time the Convention is binding on some 40 states.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. See Art 15, para. 1 of the Belgian Private International Law Act and, among others, Erauw, supra n. 15 and Geeroms, op. cit. n. 12, at103 pp. 103 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  26. See § 293 Zivilprozessorduuug and, among others, Von But and Mankowski, op. cit. n. 1, at pp. 414 et seq. with further references.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Art. 14, para. 1 of the Italian Private International Law Act.

  28. Art. 4, para. 1 of the Austrian Private International Law Act.

  29. Collins, et al., op. cit. n. 21, at pp. 221–232. See also Eentiman, op. cit. n. 21.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Cour de cassation 16 November 1993 (Amerford), Cluuet 1994, p. 98 (note by Donnier), Revue critique de droit international privé 1994, p. 332 (note by Lagarde). See also Geeroms, op. cit. n. 12, at pp. 108 et seq. with further references.

  31. Art. 281, para. 2 of the Spanish Civil Procedure Act (in force since 8 January 2001). See Garau Sobrino 2001, op. cit. n. 19, at pp. 685 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  32. See Art 16, para. 1 of the Swiss Private International Law Act 1987. See further, among others, A. Heini, et al., IPRG. Kommeutar, Kommeutar zum Buudesgesetz fiber das Internationale Privatrecht (IPRG) vom 1. Januar 1989 (Zurich, Schulthess 1993) pp. 147 et seq.; Siehr, op. cit. n. 20, at pp. 572 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  33. See, notably, Flessner 1970, loc. cit. n. 1, at pp. 547–584; Flessner 1990, op. cit. n. 1, at pp. 119 et seq.; De Boer 1996, op. cit. n. 5, at pp. 317 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  34. See, more recently, R. Husstege, ‘Zur Ermittlung auslandischen Rechts: Wie man in den Wald hineinruft, so hallt es auch zuruck’, 22 IP Rax (2002) pp. 292–294.

  35. See Flessner 1970, op. cit. n. 1, at pp. 554–555; De Boer 1996, op. cit. n. 5, at pp. 317 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  36. See De Boer 1996, op. cit. n. 5, at pp. 322 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  37. See No. 27 of the report, supra n. 6.

  38. In the same vein, Strkwerda, loc. cit. n. 8, at p. 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  39. See supra section 3.2.

  40. See, concerning Art. 25, and the corresponding provision of Art. 48 (old) of the Dutch Code of Civil Procedure, among others: J.J. Vriesendorp, Ambtshalve aanvullen van rechtsgronden in het burgerlyk geding (Zwolle, Tjeenk Willink 1970); idem, Ambtshalve aanvullen van rechtsgronden (Zwolle, Tjeenk Willink 1981); W. Hugenholtz and W.H. Heemskerk, Hoofdlijnen van Nederlands burgerlijk procesrecht, 20th edn. (The Hague, Elsevier bedrijfsinformatie 2002) No. 117; C.E. Smith, Ambtshalve aanvullen van rechtsgronden (Nijmegen, Ars Aequi Libn 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  41. Since the beginning of the twentieth century thus has been inferred via an a contrario analysis of Art. 48 (old), Dutch Code of Civil Procedure. Since January 2002 it has been given legislative form in Art 24 of the Dutch Code of Civil Procedure. See, more recently, among others, T.P.E. Tjong Tjin Tai, ‘De rechterlijke vrijheid en de feitelijke grondslag’, 10 Tijdschrift voor Civiele Rechtspleging (2002) pp. 29–37.

    Google Scholar 

  42. See, more recently, HR 15 February 2002, NJ 2002, 228.

  43. See, respectively, Art 3:322, Art. 3:51 Dutch Civil Code, and Art. 236 Dutch Code of Civil Procedure.

  44. See also P. Mayer, ‘Le juge et la loi étrangere’, 1 Schweizerische Zeitschrift für internationales und europäisches Recht (1991) pp. 481–499 at pp. 486–487; De Boer 1996, op. cit. n. 5, at pp. 327–328; Mostermans, op. cit. n. 11, at pp. 95, 126, 133–138; Hartenstein 2000, op. cit. n. 1, at pp. 3840.

    Google Scholar 

  45. See also Strikwerda, loc. cit. n. 8, at p. 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  46. See, for example, the editorial contribution in 1 Jurisprudentie Burgerlijk Procesrecht (JBPr) (2002) pp. 5–12, entitled ‘Processuele informatieplicht van partijen volgens Nieuw Recht vordering’, as well as C.J.M. Klaassen, ‘Spreken is zilver, zwijgen is fout’, NJB (2002) pp. 1450–1458.

    Google Scholar 

  47. See also W.D.H. Asser, et al., Een nieuwe balams, Interimrapport Fundmnentele herbezinning Nederlands burgerlijk procesrecht, (The Hague, Boom Juridische uitgevers 2003). In p. 77 of this report the authors argue for the joint responsibility of the courts and the parties for the smooth and efficient progress of civil proceedings. It is also argued that, besides a general duty for the parties to cooperate, the courts in turn are required to discuss with the parties during the oral hearing the factual and legal aspects of the dispute at hand, as well as to ask questions, to highlight and attempt to clarify any ambiguities and incompleteness, and as necessary to request further information or evidence.

    Google Scholar 

  48. With optional choice of law in its purest form, I am referring to a system in which the courts, in the absence of a claim by one of the parties to apply foreign law, not only refrain from applying the choice of law rule of their own motion, but also refrain from bringing the choice of law issue to the parties’ notice.

  49. A problem does, however, arise in default proceedings. An unilateral choice for forum law by the claimant can only be recognised as having legal effect if the respondent also agrees to the choice made.

  50. See, in more detail, Mostermans, in Kotfing, et al., op. cit. n. 6, at pp. 50–51. See on the question at what procedural stage (under an optional choice of law) the parties should be precluded from raising the choice of law issue, also, De Boer 1996, op. cit. n. 5, at pp. 380.382.

  51. See Art 128(3) Dutch Code of Civil Procedure. An example is the exception contesting the court’s jurisdiction.

  52. See supra n. 6 and n. 7.

  53. See also Art. 16, para. 1 of the Swiss Private International Law Act 1987. Art. 16, pam. 1 provides that the content of the applicable foreign law must be established ex officio and that, for this purpose, the collaboration of the parties may be requested.

  54. See, in the Netherlands, for a plea for the general duty of the parties to co-operate in civil proceedings as well as for the joint responsibility of the parties and the courts for the smooth and efficient progress of civil proceedings: Asser, et al., supra n. 47, at pp. 77 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  55. See also H.U. Jessurun d’Oliveira, De antikiesregel. Een pacer aspekten van de behandeling van buitenlands recht in het burgerlijk proces (Kluwer, Deventer 1971) pp. 77 et seq.; Bervoets, et al., eds., op. cit. n. 5; Mostermans, op. cit. n. 11, at pp. 57 et seq.

  56. See supra sec tion 3.2.

  57. See HR 26 maart 1982, NJ 1982, 318; Mostermans, op. cit. n. 11, at pp. 65–66, with further references.

    Google Scholar 

  58. See also, for Switzerland, Heini, et al., op. cit. n. 32, at p. 155, where the authors state that the parties can be ordered to pay costs, if they fail to comply with the order to co-operate in ascertaining the content of the applicable foreign law.

    Google Scholar 

  59. See Mostermans, op. cit. n. 11, at pp. 65–66 with further references.

    Google Scholar 

  60. In the Netherlands, there is, as yet, no prevailing doctrine with regard to the problem of unaccessible foreign law. See Mostermans, op. cit. n. 11, at pp. 67–69 as well as the report of the Dutch Standing Committee on Private International Law from 2002, supra n. 6, at No. 34. In the report of the Dutch Standing Committee preference is given to a judicial case-by-case approach.

    Google Scholar 

  61. See Hugenholt and Heemskerk, op. cit. n. 40, at No. 34. Here, the parties cannot agree upon any legal consequences, nor can they enter into arbitration agreements (Art. 1020(3) Dutch Code of Civil Procedure) or determine a choice of jurisdiction (art 8 Dutch Code of Civil Procedure).

    Google Scholar 

  62. Th.M. de Boer, Een zoo doeltreffend en rechtvaardig rnogelijke ordening’: vragen road de bestaansgrond van het internationaal privaatrecht (Amsterdam, Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen 1996) pp. 55 et seq. One can also find De Boer’s argument that the prevailing choice of law rules offer no suitable solution for the choice problem in the choice of law field, in his essay entided ‘De fictie van een neutmal conflictenrecht’, published in Kotting, et al., op. cit. n. 6, at pp. 199–259.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Of course, the Dutch legislature can only amend the rules on jurisdiction in questions related to status, insofar as ‘Brussels’ has not intervened and insofar as the material is not covered by a Convention.

  64. Tractatenblad 1968, No. 101; Tractatenblad 1997, No. 299; Tractatenblad 2000, No. 10. See also 〈http://www.hech.net〉.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    P. M. M. Mostermans Ph.D. (lecturer/researcher in private international law)

Authors
  1. P. M. M. Mostermans Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This article is a translated version of an essay by this author entitled ‘Bedenkingen tegen een facultatief conflictenrecht’, published in R. Kotting, J.A. Pontier and L. Strikwerda, Voorkeur voor de lex fori. Symposium ter gelegenheid van het afscheid van Prof. mr. Th.M. de Boer (Deventer, Kluwer 2004) pp. 37–57.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mostermans, P.M.M. Optional (Facultative) Choice of Law? Reflections from a Dutch Perspective. Neth Int Law Rev 51, 393–410 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0165070X04003936

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0165070X04003936

Keywords

Search

Navigation