The recent e-Filit conference, held in Stockholm on 9-10 July 2024, tackled emerging issues in the context of the application of the Brussels I-bis Regulation (Regulation (EU) 1215/2012) and highlighted the evolving landscape of cross-border legal interactions within the European Union (EU), particularly in the context of increasing business transactions and mobility across EU member states.

The two-year e-Filit project implemented by EIPA as lead in consortium with the Polish National School of Judiciary and Public Prosecution (KSSIP), the European Union of Judicial Officers (UEHJ), the Ecole de Formation des Barreaux (EFB), the Order of Solicitors and Enforcement Agents (OSAE), and the Uniunea Nationala a Barourilor din Romania (UNBR) aims to strengthen the application of EU legislative instruments in civil, commercial, and family law.

Brussels I-bis Regulation

To date, the Brussels I-bis Regulation plays a special role among the numerous instruments of EU private international and procedural law. The Brussels regime, which started with the 1968 Brussels Convention, is the oldest EU procedural law regime and it has developed with consistency over the decades.

This development has been continuously flanked and steered by the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Remarkably, due to their broad scope of application, between the years 2015-2022 the Brussels I and I-bis Regulations have generated twice as many decisions in the field of private international law than all the other EU instruments combined.

Among the Conference’s key takeaways:

The Cross-Border Element in the Brussels I-bis Regulation: Shifting boundaries?

This discussion delved into the intricacies of the Brussels I-bis Regulation, focusing on its application to cross-border legal disputes within the EU. Article 81 TFEU mandates, at paragraph 1, that: “The Union shall develop judicial cooperation in civil matters having cross-border implications, based on the principle of mutual recognition of judgments and of decisions in extrajudicial cases”.

Nonetheless, as emphasised in this segment of the Conference, the notion of cross-border element is not uniform in the context of the instruments that regulate EU judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters. In particular, the EU legislature has intentionally omitted to include an autonomous notion in the text of the Brussels I-bis Regulation, leaving the crafting of this notion to the case-law of the CJEU, instead. Against this background, in Owusu, Parking and Interplastics, Maletic, and more recently in Inkreal the CJEU has progressively established a broad notion of cross-border element within the meaning of the Brussels I-bis Regulation. This notion is reflected also in AG Emiliou’s Opinion in JX, the judgment of which is expected to be issued on July 29th 2024.

The Interface between the Brussels I-bis Regulation and Arbitration: An ever-debated relationship

The relationship between the Brussels I-bis Regulation and arbitration is a topic of ongoing and stimulating debate. While the Regulation explicitly excludes arbitration from its scope (Article 1(2)(d)), it still impacts arbitration proceedings indirectly. As the presentation compellingly highlighted, the Regulation also interacts with the 1958 New York Convention on Arbitral Awards, which is the primary international framework for recognising and enforcing arbitral awards. The Regulation’s jurisdictional rules and provisions for recognition and enforcement of judgments are central to its effectiveness. However, its interface with arbitration highlights ongoing legal challenges, particularly in balancing respect for arbitral autonomy with the need for consistent judicial practices across the EU.

These discussions are essential for legal practitioners navigating the complexities of international litigation and arbitration within the EU framework. Against this background, key topics included the enforcement of judgments that may conflict with arbitration agreements, the concept of anti-suit injunctions, and notable case law of the CJEU, including Allianz (West Tankers), Gazprom, and London Steam-Ship Owners, which illustrate the practical challenges and legal nuances at this intersection.

Lights and Shadows of Provisional Measures under the Brussels I-bis Regulation

The Brussels I-bis Regulation emphasises the importance of provisional measures in international litigation to preserve the status quo and ensure effective enforcement of judgments. These measures face complexities in cross-border cases, requiring specific provisions for recognition and enforcement within the EU. The conference effectively highlighted, through hypotheticals and real-life cases as well as the seminal judgments of the CJEU in this area of the law (among its more recent judgments, see TOTO), the autonomous concept of these measures and the dual-track jurisdictional system under the Regulation.

Want to know more?

The themes discussed at the conference align closely with several courses offered on our website, providing participants with deeper insights into specific areas of EU law:

To the course overview

By attending these courses, legal professionals can enhance their understanding of the complex regulatory environment highlighted at the conference, equipping them with the knowledge and skills necessary to navigate cross-border legal challenges effectively.