Skip to main content
View expanded cover

European Tort Law 2005 pp 650–682Cite as

The Project of Harmonizing European Tort Law

  • Chapter

  • 315 Accesses

Part of the Tort and Insurance Law book series (TILY,volume 2005)

H. Conclusion

It is inevitable that the project of harmonization of European tort law will become the subject of political debate and conflict, both with respect to the merits of harmonization generally and with respect to particular issues that form the substance of harmonization. This is the way of decision-making within democratic societies. Absent the benevolent dictator, it is the best way of decision-making available. However, once the politicians and lobbyists have taken the floor we will all be happy to have sets of Principles which were discussed and drafted by a group of scholars, neutral and devoted to the promotion of justice in Europe.

University of Bonn. This article is an extended version of a paper presented at the conference of the European Group on Tort Law held in Vienna, 19–20 May 2005, where the Principles of European Tort Law were presented to the public. The manuscript was brought up to date as of June 2006. An earlier version was published in 42 Common Market Law Review (CML Rev.) 2005, 1269–1312.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. European Group on Tort Law, Principles of European Tort Law (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Cf. G. Wagner, The Economics of Harmonization: The Case of Contract Law, 39 CML Rev. 2002, 995; G. Wagner, in: J.M. Smits (ed.), The Need for a European Contract Law (Europa Law Publishing, 2005) 1 ff.; and the other contributions in this volume by Helmut Wagner, Jaap Hage, Heico Kerkmeester, Jeff Rachlinski, Thomas Wilhelmsson and Jan Smits. Cf. also D.M. Curtin/J.M. Smits/A. Klip/J.A. McCahery, European Integration and Law (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cf. Recital 3 to the European Parliament and Council Directive on the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees, Official Journal of the European Communities (O.J.) 1999, L 171/12: The laws of the Member States concerning the sale of consumer goods are quite disparate, with the result that national consumer goods markets differ from one another and that competition between sellers may be distorted (emphasis added).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cf. Editorial Comments: On the Way to a European Consumer Sales Law?, 34 CML Rev. 1997, 207, 209; Wagner, 39 CML Rev. 2002, 1004 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  5. European Commission, Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II), COM(2003)427 final; see also Art. 5(1) of the Amended Proposal for European Parliament and Council Regulation on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II), 21 February 2006, COM(2006)83 final. Cf. G. Wagner, Internationales Deliktsrecht, die Arbeiten an der Rom II-Verordnung und der Europäische Deliktsgerichtsstand, Praxis des Internationalen Privat-und Verfahrensrechts (IPrax) 2006, 372.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on European contract law, O.J. 2001, C 255/5 ff., par. 31 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Wagner, 39 CML Rev. 2002, 1004 ff., 1013 ff.; O. Lando, Optional or Mandatory Europeanisation of Contract Law, European Review of Private Law (Euro Rev Priv L) 2000, 59, 61.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Council Directive 85/374/EEC on the Approximation of the Laws, Regulations and Administrative Provisions of the Member States Concerning Liability for Defective Products of 25 July 1985, O.J. 1985, L 210/29.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Case C-52/00, Commission v France, [2002] European Court Reports (ECR) I-3827 par. 13 ff.; Case C-154/00, Commission v Greece, [2002] ECR I-3879, par. 9 ff.; Case C-183/00, González Sánchez v Medicina Asturiana SA, [2002] ECR I-3901 par. 23 f.

    Google Scholar 

  10. González Sánchez (fn. 9) par. 31.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cf., e.g. Art. 42 of the German Einführungsgesetz zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch (EGBGB); for a comparative exposition see T. Kadner-Graziano, Europäisches Internationales Deliktsrecht (2003) 26 f.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Commission Proposal (Rome II) (fn. 5) 13; Wagner, IPRax 2006, 372, 386 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Art. 4 par. 2 of the revised draft regulation, Amended Proposal for European Parliament and Council Regulation on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II), 21 February 2006, COM(2006)83 final, 13 f.; Wagner, IPRax 2006, 372, 387 f.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Council of the European Union, 10 February 2006, Doc. 6165/06, 9.

    Google Scholar 

  15. See, e.g. Art. 41 EGBGB, G. Wagner, Anwaltskommentar zum BGB, Vol. 1, 2005, Art. 41 no. 12.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Commission Proposal (Rome II) (fn. 5) 13.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Commission Proposal (Rome II) (fn. 5) 13.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Ch. von Bar/ U. Drobnig, The Interaction of Contract Law and Tort and Property Law in Europe (Sellier, 2004) no. 702, echoing a famous dictum by Leo Raape; cf. L. Raape/F. Sturm, Internationales Privatrecht, Vol. I (6th ed. 1977) 199.

    Google Scholar 

  19. P. Legrand, 60 Modern Law Review (MLR) 1997, 44, 49 ff.; a similar version of this paper written in French was published under the title: Sens et non-sens d’un code civil Européen, Revue Internationale de Droit Comparé (R.I.D.C.) 1996, 779, 780 ff., 789 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ibid. 44, 53 f.; cf. also R.I.D.C. 779, 798 f.

    Google Scholar 

  21. P. Legrand, The Impossibility of ‘Legal Transplants’, 4 Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law (MJ) 1997, 111, 210.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Legrand, MLR 1997, 44, 52; R.I.D.C. 1996, 779, 781.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Legrand, MLR 1997, 44, 56, emphasis in original.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Y. Lequette, Dalloz (2002) 2202; for a much more balanced approach along the same lines B. Fauvarque-Cosson, Faut-il un Code civil européen?, Révue Trimestrielle de Droit Civil (RTDciv.) 2002, 463.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Lequette (fn. 25) 2202, 2207, 2211 ff. note 74.

    Google Scholar 

  26. H. Muir Watt/ G. Canivet, Européanisation du droit privé et justice sociale, Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht (ZEuP) 2005, 517.

    Google Scholar 

  27. For details cf. K. Zweigert/ H. Kötz, Einführung in die Rechtsvergleichung (Mohr, 3rd ed. 1996) 102 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Zweigert/ Kötz (fn. 28) 106.

    Google Scholar 

  29. J. Montesquieu, De l’esprit des lois, Vol. 1 (1748) book 11, chap. 6, 305.

    Google Scholar 

  30. This is the powerful theme in Raul C. van Caenegem, European Law in the Past and the Future (Cambridge UP, 2002) 1 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  31. For details see F. Wieacker, Privatrechtsgeschichte der Neuzeit (2nd ed. 1967) 124 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  32. A. Watson, Legal Transplants and European Private Law, 4.4 Electronic Journal of Comparative Law, December 2000, law.kub.nl./ejcl/44/44-2.html.

    Google Scholar 

  33. G. Wagner, Grundstrukturen des Europäischen Deliktsrechts, in: R. Zimmermann (ed.), Grundstrukturen des Europäischen Deliktsrechts (Nomos, 2003) 189, 281 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Cambridge Water Co. v Eastern Counties Leather Plc., [1994] 2 Appeal Cases (A.C.) 264, 305 (H.L.(E.) 1993, per Lord Goff of Chieveley).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Entscheidungen des (deutschen) Bundesgerichtshofs in Zivilsachen (BGHZ) 55, 229, 234; cf. Wagner (fn. 34) 275 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  36. For a thorough treatment see Wagner, Grundstrukturen des Europäischen Deliktsrechts, in: R. Zimmermann (ed.), Grundstrukturen des Europäischen Deliktsrechts (Nomos, 2003) (fn. 34) 220 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  37. R. Zimmermann, Roman Law, Contemporary Law, European Law (OUP, 2001) 112 ff

    Google Scholar 

  38. J. Spier, in: European Group on Tort Law, Principles of European Tort Law (2005) Introduction, no. 20.

    Google Scholar 

  39. See fn. 36.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Wagner Grundstrukturen des Europäischen Deliktsrechts, in: R. Zimmermann (ed.), Grundstrukturen des Europäischen Deliktsrechts (Nomos, 2003) (fn. 34) 283 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  41. See infra, E, fn. 68.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Spier (fn. 39) Art. 3:102 no. 8, 12; Art. 3: 103 no. 7.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Spier (fn. 39) Art. 3:102 no. 9.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Cf. G. Wagner, in: Münchener Kommentar zum BGB, Vol. 5 (4th ed. 2004) Sec. 830 no. 53 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Spier (fn. 39) Introduction, no. 32.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Case C-168/00, Simone Leitner v TUI Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG, [2002] ECR I-2631. Although the plaintiff suffered personal injury (salmonella infection), compensation for pain and suffering was not in issue as this head of damages had been recognized by Austrian law. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) was solely concerned with damages for loss of enjoyment of the holidays (entgangene Urlaubsfreude); cf. par. 10 of the judgment.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Council Directive 90/314/EEC of 13 June 1990 on package travel, package holidays and package tours, O.J. 1990, L 158/59–64.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Simone Leitner (fn. 48) at par. 23; see also the case notes by W. Henning Roth, 40 CML Rev. 2003, 937; K. Tonner, 11 ZEuP 2003, 623.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Roth, 40 CML Rev. 2003, 940.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Allgemeines Landrecht für die Preußischen Staaten of 1794, reprint 1970, part I, title 6, par. 1–138.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Cf. Wagner Grundstrukturen des Europäischen Deliktsrechts, in: R. Zimmermann (ed.), Grundstrukturen des Europäischen Deliktsrechts (Nomos, 2003) 189 (fn. 34) 197 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  52. The terms “principle” and “rule” as employed in the present context refer to the level of abstraction of a particular legal norm, not to the contrast between norms which are strictly binding (rules) and others which allow and require to be balanced by competing norms (principles); cf. Wagner Grundstrukturen des Europäischen Deliktsrechts, in: R. Zimmermann (ed.), Grundstrukturen des Europäischen Deliktsrechts (Nomos, 2003) (fn. 34) 199 with further reference; R. Zimmermann, Principles of European Contract Law and Principles of European Tort Law: Comparison and Points of Conctact, in: H. Koziol/B.C. Steininger (eds.), European Tort Law 2003 (2004), no. 6.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Spier (fn. 39) Introduction, 22 ff.; as to the concept of a flexible system see W. Wilburg, Die Elemente des Schadensrechts (1941) 26 ff.; see also the contributions in: F. Bydlinski/H. Krejci/B. Schilcher/V. Steininger (eds.), Das Bewegliche System im geltenden und künftigen Recht (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  54. See infra E, fn. 68.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Cf. W. van Boom/ H. Koziol/ C.A. Witting (eds.), Pure Economic Loss (2004); M. Bussani/V.V. Palmer (eds.), Pure Economic Loss in Europe (2003); E.K. Banakas (ed.), Civil Liability for Pure Economic Loss (1996); F. Gómez/J.A. Ruiz, The Plural — and Misleading Notion of Economic Loss in Tort: A Law and Economics Perspective, 12 ZEuP 2004, 908; see also Wagner (fn. 34) 230 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  56. H. Koziol, in: European Group on Tort Law, Principles of European Tort Law (2005) Art. 2:102 no. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  57. P. Widmer, in: European Group on Tort Law, Principles of European Tort Law (2005) Art. 4:102 no. 16 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  58. B. A. Koch, in: European Group on Tort Law, Principles of European Tort Law (2005) Art. 5:101 par. 16.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Ibid., Art. 7:102 par. 2.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Cf. H. Goerlich, Wertordnung und Grundgesetz (1973) 131 ff.; B. Schlink, Abwägung im Verfassungsrecht (1976) 128 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Spier (fn. 39).

    Google Scholar 

  62. Reprinted in G. Wagner, Das neue Schadensersatzrecht (2002) 100.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd., [2002] 3 Weekly Law Reports (WLR) 89, 110 ff. (H.L.(E.), 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  64. Spier (fn. 39) Art. 3:102 no. 9.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Ibid., no. 8 ff.; Art. 3:103 no. 7.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Wagner (fn. 45) Sect. 830 no. 50.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Cf. BGH, 11 January 1994, Neue Juristische Wochenschrift (NJW) 1994, 932, 934; Wagner (fn. 45) Sect. 830 no. 53 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  68. European Commission, Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I), 15 December 2005, COM(2005)650 final; see also Green Paper on the conversion of the Rome Convention of 1980 on the law applicable to contractual obligations into a Community instrument and its modernisation, COM(2002)654 final.

    Google Scholar 

  69. O. Lando/ H. Beale, Principles of European Contract Law, Parts I and II, (Aspen, 2000) XI.

    Google Scholar 

  70. The original draft is reprinted at 21 American Journal of Comparative Law (AJCL) 1973, 587; 38 RabelsZ 1974, 211 cf. Art. 10–12 in particular.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Cf. Lando/ Beale (fn. 74) see also O. Lando/E. Clive/A. Prüm/R. Zimmermann (eds.), Principles of European Contract Law, Part III (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  73. Ibid., XXIII ff.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Resolution A2-157/89, O.J. 1989, C 158/400; Resolution A3-0329/94, O.J. 1994, C 205/518; Resolution B5-0228, 0229, 0230/2000; O.J. 2000, C 377/323, 326.

    Google Scholar 

  75. O.J. 2001, C 255/1; see also Council Report on the need to approximate Member States’ legislation in civil matters, adopted by the Council 16 November 2001, DGH III 13017/01. European Parliament, Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market, Report on the approximation of the civil and commercial law of the Member States, A 5-0384/2001 Final: European Parliament resolution on the approximation of the civil and commercial law of the Member States; Raporteur Klaus-Heiner Lehne.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council: A more coherent European Contract Law — An action plan, 12 February 2003, COM (2003) 68 final, 2.

    Google Scholar 

  77. M.W. Hesselink, The European Commission’s Action Plan: Towards a More Coherent European Contract Law, Euro Rev Priv L 2004, 397.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Report from the Commission, First Annual Progress Report on European Contract Law and the Acquis Review, 23 September 2005, COM(2005)456 final; see also European Parliament, Committee on Legal Affairs, Report on European contract law and the revision of the acquis: The way forward, A6-0055/2006; European Parliament resolution on European contract law and the revision of the acquis: the way forward, P6_TA(2006)0109; see also the information at http://europa.eu.int/comm/consumers/cons_int/safe_shop/fair_bus_pract/cont_law/index_en. htm; http://www.copecl.org.

    Google Scholar 

  79. A number of topics involving the CFR will be addressed in several articles forthcoming in ZEuP 2007, 1st issue.

    Google Scholar 

  80. The interplay between the Principles of European Contract Law and the Principles of European Tort Law is expounded by Zimmermann B.C. Steininger (eds.), European Tort Law 2003 (2004), no. 6 (fn. 54) 1 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Von Bar/ Drobnig (fn. 19).

    Google Scholar 

  82. Ibid., no. 702.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Ibid., no. 712; see also no. 736.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Wagner (fn. 45) Vor Sect. 823 no. 61.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Spier (fn. 39) Introduction, no. 41.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Stevens, Hedley Byrne v. Heller — Judicial Creativity and Doctrinal Possibility, 27 MLR 1964, 121, 161; A. Tunc, Torts, Introduction, in: International Encyclopedia of Comparative Law, Vol. XI, chap. 1, no. 32, 44.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Wagner Grundstrukturen des Europäischen Deliktsrechts, in: R. Zimmermann (ed.), Grundstrukturen des Europäischen Deliktsrechts (Nomos, 2003) (fn. 34) 232 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Wagner (fn. 45) Sect. 826, no. 53 ff., 58.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Y. Lequette, Quelques remarques à propos du projet de code civil européen de M. von Bar, Dalloz (2002) 2202, 2210.

    Google Scholar 

  90. See fn. 47.

    Google Scholar 

  91. 10 European Law Journal (E.L.J.) 2004, 653; see also T. Wilhelmsson, Private Law in the EU: Harmonised or Fragmented Europeanisation?, Euro Rev Priv L 2002, 77, 84 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Study Group on Social Justice in European Contract Law, 10 E.L.J. 2004, 653, 655 ff., 662 ff.; Wilhelmsson, Euro Rev Priv L 2002, 97, 77, 84: “Return to liberalism” as the price to be paid for harmonization.

    Google Scholar 

  93. Study Group on Social Justice in European Contract Law, E.L.J. 2004, 662, 664.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Study Group on Social Justice in European Contract Law, E.L.J. 2004, 665.

    Google Scholar 

  95. See also Wilhelmsson, Eur Rev Priv L 2002, 86.

    Google Scholar 

  96. Study Group on Social Justice in European Contract Law, E.L.J. 2004, 670.

    Google Scholar 

  97. R. Craswell, Passing on the Costs of Legal Rules: Efficiency and Distribution in Buyer-Seller Relationships, 43 Stanford Law Review 1001, 361, 366 ff.; but also D. Kennedy, Distributive and Paternalist Motives in Contract and Tort Law, with Special Reference to Compulsory Terms and Unequal Bargaining Power, 41 Maryland Law Review 1982, 563, 604 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Cf. Koch (fn. 61) Art. 5:101 no. 9.

    Google Scholar 

  99. Cf. P. Widmer, Die Vereinheitlichung des schweizerischen Haftungsrechts — Brennpunkte eines Projekts, 130 Zeitschrift des Berner Juristenvereins (ZBerJV) 1994, 385, 397; D. Koch, Die Gesamtrevision des schweizerischen Haftpflichtrechts, 9 ZEuP 2001, 753. The Swiss Federal Government has recently dropped the plans to reform the law of delict.

    Google Scholar 

  100. Cf. G. Wagner, Comparative Report in: G. Wagner (ed.), Tort Law and Liability Insurance (2005) 307 ff.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Rechts- und Staatswissenschaftliche Fakultät, Universität Bonn, Adenauerallee 24-42, 53113, Bonn, Germany

    Gerhard Wagner

Authors
  1. Gerhard Wagner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. European Centre of Tort and Insurance Law and Research Unit for European Tort Law, Landesgerichtsstraße 11, A-1080, Vienna, Austria

    Helmut Koziol

  2. Research Unit for European Tort Law, Landesgerichtsstraße 11, A-1080, Vienna, Austria

    Barbara C. Steininger

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer-Verlag/Wien

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wagner, G. (2006). The Project of Harmonizing European Tort Law. In: Koziol, H., Steininger, B.C. (eds) European Tort Law 2005. Tort and Insurance Law, vol 2005. Springer, Vienna. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-211-31136-3_34

Download citation