Restating the Acquis Communautaire? A Critical Examination of the ‘Principles of the Existing EC Contract Law’

Published date01 July 2008
DOIhttp://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2008.00704.x
Date01 July 2008
THE
MODERN LAW REVIEW
Vo l u me 7 1 J u l y 2 0 0 8 No 4
Rest ati ng t he Acquis Communautaire? A Critical
Examination of the‘Principles of the Existing EC
Contract Law’
Nils Jansen and Reinhard Zimmermann
n
The article examines the ‘Principles of the Existing EC Contract Law’ (Acquis Principles) pub-
lished by the European ResearchGroup on the Existing EC Contract Law (AcquisGroup), a key
player within the academic network charged with the preparation of a ‘Common Frame of
Reference’. The Acquis Principles may therefore have a considerable impact on the shape and
developmentof EC Contract Law. It is argued that the AcquisPri nciplesdo not constitute merely
a restatement, or systematic revision, of existing EC private law. To a signi¢cant extent, the
Acquis Group has drafted desirable rules’, based on‘political’ decisions that may even entail a
transformationtowards a regulatory modelof privatelaw.At the same time, the Acquis Principles
clearly demonstrate that the acquis communautaire is not a coherent system ofcontract law that can
be taken to have emancipated itself from the acquis commun.
INTRODUCTION
For a long time the systematic harmonization of European private law has been
regarded, very largely, as a task for legal scholarship; milestones, in that respect,
wereworkssuchasErnstRabelsRecht des Warenkaufs (1936/1958) and the Princi-
ples of European Contract Law (PECL) of the so-called Lando-Commission
(1995, 2000 and 2003).
1
But from the end of the 1990s that idea has also been on
the political agenda. After the European Parliament had called for the prepara-
n
Nils Jansen is Professor of RomanLaw and European Private Law,WestphalianWilhelms-University,
Mˇnster;Reinhard Zimmermann is Director ofthe Max Planck Institutefor Comparative and Interna-
tionalPrivateLaw,Hamburg,and Professorof PrivateLaw, RomanLawand Comparative Legal History,
University of Regensburg.This essay, which also constitutes a review of The Research Group on the
Existing EC Private Law (Acquis Group) (ed), Principles of the Existing EC ContractLaw (Acquis Principles).
ContractI. Pre-contractualObligations,Conclusion ofContract,UnfairTerms(Mˇnchen: Sellier, 2007),is based on
a joint seminar with students of theWestphalianWilhelms-University, Mˇnster, and the University of
Regensburg in the AustrianAlps.Weare grateful to the participantsof that seminar for theirconstructive
contributions. An earlier German version of this essay has appearedin [2007] Juristenzeitung 1113^ 112 6.
1 O. Landoand H. Beale (eds),Princ iples of Europea n Contract L aw, Part I (Deventer:Nijho¡,1995);O.Lando
and H. Beale,Principles of European Contract Law,Parts I and II (Den Haag: Kluwer, 2000); O. Lando, E.
Clive, A. Prˇm and R. Zimmermann (eds), Principles of European Contract Law, Part III (Den Haag:
Kluwer, 2003); see also R.Zimmermann,‘The Principles of European Contract Law:Contemporary
Manifestation of the Old, and Possible Foundation for a New,Europe an Scholarship of Private Law’in
F.Faust and G. Thˇsing (eds), Beyond Borders: Perspectiveson Int ernational and Comparative Law ^ Essays in
Honour of Hei n K˛tz (K˛ln: Heymann, 2006) 111; idem,‘Comparative Law and the Europeanization of
r2008 The Authors.Journal Compilation r20 08The Modern Law Review Limited.
Published by BlackwellPublishing, 9600 Garsington Road,Oxford OX4 2DQ,UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA
(2008) 71(4) 505^534
tion, and subsequent introduction, of a European Civil Code in two resolutions
of 1989 and 1994,
2
the Council of the European Union, too, requested the
Commission to investigate the need for such a comprehensive act of legislation.
The Commission responded with a Communication on European Contract
Law
3
which sparked an intensive debate on whether and to what extent it
would be desirable to harmonize, or even unify, European private law and
which options were available to achieve that end.
4
The European Parliament
even felt encouraged to propose an extremely ambitious timescale for the
enactment of a European Civil Code by the year 2010.
5
It was against this
political background that a group of academics, centred around Christian
von Bar, decided to establish a Study Group on a European Civil Code (hence-
forth: Study Group).
6
It envisaged the preparation of a Draft Code going far
beyond the PECL and covering the entire ¢eld of patrimonial law. In the mean-
time, the ¢rst results of the work of the Study Group have been published.
7
But as the non-contractual branches of patrimonial law (tort, unjusti¢ed enrich-
ment, transfer of property, real securities in movables) have developed much
less homogeneously in the various European legal systems than the law of
contract,
8
thedraftspublishedbytheStudyGroupcannotclaimtobeagenuinely
European text of reference in the same way as the Principles of European
Contract Law.
9
However, in a second Communication, entitledA More Coherent European
Contract Law: An Action Plan’, the European Commission relegated the idea of
Private Law’ in M. Reimann and R. Zimmermann (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Law
(Oxford: OxfordUniversityPress, 2006) 539, 560^564, and the sourcescited in these essays.
2 Resolution A2-157/89 [1989]OJ C158/400; Resolution A3- 0329/94 [1994] OJ C205/518; see also,
from 2000, Resolutions B5 -0228, 0229 and 0230/2000 [2000] OJ C377/323; the ¢rst two resolu-
tions are easily accessible in (1993) 1 Zeitschrift fˇr Europa
ºischesPrivatrecht 613and (1995) 3 Zeitschrift
fˇr Europa
ºischesPrivatrecht 669.
3 Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on Eur-
opean Contract Law COM(2001) 398 ¢nal (11 July 2001); see (2001) 9 Zeitschrift fˇr Europa
ºisches
Privatrecht963.
4 For a comprehensive overview, s ee N. Jansen, Binnenmarkt, Privatrecht und europa
ºische Identita
ºt
(Tˇbingen:Mohr Siebeck, 2004) 2^6 with further references.
5 Resolution of the EuropeanParliament on the approximationof the civil and commercial law of
the Member States,OJ C140E/538; see (2002) 10Zeitschrift fˇrEuropa
ºisches Privatrecht 634.
6 On that Group, see C. von Bar,‘Die Study Groupon a European Civil Code’ in Festschrift fˇrDieter
Henrich (Bielefeld: Gieseking, 2000) 1; W. Wurmnest, ‘Common Core, Kodi¢kationsentwˇrfe,
Acquis-Grundsa
ºtze ^ Ansa
ºtze von internationalen Wissenschaftlergruppen zur Privatrechtsver-
einheitlichung in Europa’ (2003) 11Zeitschriftfˇr Europa
ºischesPrivatrecht 714, 732^735.
7 Study Groupon a European Civil Code, C. vonBar (eds), BenevolentIntervention in Another’sA¡airs
(PEL Ben Int) (Mˇnchen: Sellier, 2006);Study Group on a European Civil Code, M. Hesselink,
J.W. Rutgers, O.Bue no D|¤az, M. Scottona ndM. Veldman (eds), CommercialAgency, Franchiseand
Distribution Contracts(PEL CAFDC) (Mˇnchen: Sellier, 2006);Study Group on a European Civil
Code, M. Barendrecht, C. Jansen, M. Loos, A. Pinna, R. Cascao, S. van Gulijk (eds), Service
Contracts (PEL SC) (Mˇnchen: Sellier, 2006); Study Group on a European Civil Code, U.
Drobnig (eds), Personal Security (PEL Pers Sec) (Mˇnchen: Sellier, 2007); Study Groupo n a Eur-
opean Civil Code, E. Hondius,V. Heutger, C. Jeloschek, H. Sivesand, A. Wiewiorowska (eds),
Sales(PEL S) (Mˇnchen: Sellier, 2008).
8Jansen,Binnenmarkt, n 4 above, 31^63.
9 See, as far as‘benevolent intervention’is concerned, N. Jansen,‘Negotiorum Gestio und Benevolent
Intervention in Another’s A¡airs: Principles of European Law?’ (2007) 15 Zeitschrift fˇr Euro-
pa
ºischesPrivatrecht 962.
Restating the Acquis Communautaire?
506 r2008 The Authors. Journal Compilation r2008 The Modern LawReview Limited.
(2008) 71(4) 505^534

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT