European Private Law: Challenge and Chimera
| Published date | 01 September 1994 |
| Author | Michael Milo,Madeleine van Rossum |
| Date | 01 September 1994 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1023263X9400100301 |
| Subject Matter | Editorial |
Editorial
European
Private
Law:
Challenge
and
Chimera
European private law is an inspiration for many private law jurists. The issue has come
to enjoy a lot of attention over the past decade with the major driving force being the
European Community in a variety of ways. This fact is i1lustrated by a resolution
regarding the development of a European private law which was adopted by the
European Parliament last April. 1This is the second time that the Parliament has
concerned itself with this issue: five years ago, in 1989, it adopted a similar resolution
regarding harmonization of the European private law systems." Hopefully more
attention will be paid to this second initiative.
Although harmonization, and ultimately codification, of private law appear to be the
ultimate goal of this resolution, other objectives are also stated: it is considered that a
commission of experts should define short-term and long-term harmonization, and the
work of UNIDROIT, UNCITRAL, and the Lando Commission, should be promoted.
All the mentioned objectives are highly valuable, but that is usually the case with
general statements. They pave the road towards this final objective of a European civil
code. As a result of the activities
of
the European Community much partial
harmonization has already been accomplished, e.g. in the area of consumer law and
company law.
To put this in a historical perspective let us now take a short, comparative look at Dutch
legal history. Slightly more than a century ago, in 1874, the then recently established
Dutch Associations of Jurists (Nederlandsche Juristenvereeniging) had its annual
meeting. Focusing that year on civil liability
of
rail companies, it discussed the necessity
of moderating the fault-principle. The necessity of dealing with this problem in a
European perspective was recognised and explicitly mentioned. However, as was
pointed out at the time, nobody believed in international regulation because there was
too much political trouble in Europe which made this impossible. The discussion on this
subject was therefore centred around national legal principles; Dutch legal science was,
also in this area, to enter its heyday of legalism, the Dutch counterpart of the French
I. [1994]
OJ.
C205/518.
2. PB C 158. 26.6.89. p. 400-401
228 MJ 1 (1994)
To continue reading
Request your trial