Mandatory norms in the context of Estonian and European international contract law: the examples of consumers and posted workers
Date
2019-10-08
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Rahvusvahelises lepinguõiguses kehtivast lepinguvabaduse põhimõttest tulenevalt on lepingupooltel õigus ise kokku leppida, millise riigi õigust nendevahelisele lepingule kohaldada tuleb. Rooma I määrus, mis reguleerib lepingulistele võlasuhetele kohaldatavat õigust, näeb selles osas siiski ette mitmeid olulisi piiranguid. Muuhulgas kuuluvad siia piirangud, mille eesmärgiks on kohtu asukohariigi olulisimate põhimõtete kaitse (nt kohtu asukohariigi üldist kehtivust omavad sätted ja avalik kord), aga ka lepingulises suhtes eelduslikult nõrgemat poolt kaitsvad sätted (nt tarbija- ja individuaalsete töölepingute osas).
Nende üldiste ja spetsiifiliste kohaldatava õiguse valiku vabaduse põhimõtet piiravate normide omavaheline vahekord ei ole siiski selge. Lisaks tuleb arvestada, et tarbijalepingute ja individuaalsete töölepingute osas on EL-s vastu võetud mitmeid eri direktiive, mis omakorda sisaldavad kohaldatava õiguse valikut piiravaid sätteid ja mis erinevalt EL määrustest tuleb riigisisesesse õigusesse täiendavalt üle võtta. Seega vajab käsitlemist ka küsimus, milline on direktiivide ja neil põhinevate riigisiseste sätete roll Rooma I määruses sisalduvate nõrgema lepingupoole kaitsesätete kõrval, aga ka Rooma I määruses sisalduvate avalikku huvi kaitsvate normide kõrval. Samuti tuleb analüüsida, kas direktiivid on töös käsitletavas osas Eesti õigusesse õigesti üle võetud ning kas neid rakendatakse õigesti. Eelnev ongi doktoritöö eesmärgiks.
Töös jõutakse järeldusele, et tarbijalepingute direktiivide osas võiksid kollisiooniõiguslikud küsimused edaspidi jääda Rooma I määruse lahendada, lähetatud töötajate töölepingute osas aga on jätkuvalt vajadus ka lähetatud töötajate erisusi arvestava direktiivi järele. Avaliku korra erandi roll tarbijate ja lähetatud töötajate kaitsmisel jääb väitekirjas toodust nähtuvalt ka edaspidi tõenäoliselt üksnes marginaalseks.
International contract law is known to widely adhere to the principle of freedom of choice of law. Therefore, the parties to the contract are generally free to choose the law to govern their contract. Nevertheless, the Rome I Regulation, which regulates the law applicable to contractual obligations, also sets forth certain important limits to party autonomy. These serve mainly to safeguard the fundamental principles of the forum country (e.g overall mandatory provisions and public policy clause) as well as to protect the typically weaker parties to international contracts (these include, for example, contracts with consumers and employees). However, the interface of these general and specific limitations to party autonomy is unsettled. What is more, the criteria to designate the law applicable to such contracts involving a weaker party is, in domains such as various consumer contracts and individual employment contracts involving the posting of workers, further supplemented by specific conflict-of-law provisions deriving from different EU directives that require transposition into national laws. It is therefore worth asking which role do these directives and their national implementing measures play in relation to the protective rules already established in the Rome I Regulation. In addition, the conformity of the Estonian transposing provisions as well as of the Estonian jurisprudence to the directives need further analysis. These are the matters this research aims to tackle. The dissertation concludes that the questions of determining whether the consumer retains the protection granted by the directives in situations wherein the law applicable to the contract is that of a third country should subsequently be referred to the Rome I Regulation. However, it also indicates the continuous need, in addition to the Rome I Regulation, for an instrument which takes into account the specificities of postings. Finally, the research leads to the conclusion that the role of the public policy exception in protecting consumers and posted workers is likely to remain marginal.
International contract law is known to widely adhere to the principle of freedom of choice of law. Therefore, the parties to the contract are generally free to choose the law to govern their contract. Nevertheless, the Rome I Regulation, which regulates the law applicable to contractual obligations, also sets forth certain important limits to party autonomy. These serve mainly to safeguard the fundamental principles of the forum country (e.g overall mandatory provisions and public policy clause) as well as to protect the typically weaker parties to international contracts (these include, for example, contracts with consumers and employees). However, the interface of these general and specific limitations to party autonomy is unsettled. What is more, the criteria to designate the law applicable to such contracts involving a weaker party is, in domains such as various consumer contracts and individual employment contracts involving the posting of workers, further supplemented by specific conflict-of-law provisions deriving from different EU directives that require transposition into national laws. It is therefore worth asking which role do these directives and their national implementing measures play in relation to the protective rules already established in the Rome I Regulation. In addition, the conformity of the Estonian transposing provisions as well as of the Estonian jurisprudence to the directives need further analysis. These are the matters this research aims to tackle. The dissertation concludes that the questions of determining whether the consumer retains the protection granted by the directives in situations wherein the law applicable to the contract is that of a third country should subsequently be referred to the Rome I Regulation. However, it also indicates the continuous need, in addition to the Rome I Regulation, for an instrument which takes into account the specificities of postings. Finally, the research leads to the conclusion that the role of the public policy exception in protecting consumers and posted workers is likely to remain marginal.
Description
Väitekirja elektrooniline versioon ei sisalda publikatsioone
Keywords
rahvusvaheline õigus, lepinguõigus, võlasuhted, tarbijalepingud, lähetused, töölepingud, õigusnormid, Eesti, Euroopa