The public/private divide in european law

European Private Law after the Common Frame of Reference

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 56-89

  Reich, Norbert ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BREMEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84881983170     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (122)

1. Ulp. Dig. 1, 1, 1, 2, cited by Larenz and Wolf, Allgemeiner Teil des Bürgerlichen Rechts, 8.A., 1997, para 1 n. 20.
2. BVerfGE 89, 155 at 188; English translation [1994] 1 CMLR 57. For a recent analysis see J.B. Cruz, 'The Legacy of the Maastricht-Urteil and the Pluralist Movement', [2008] ELJ 389. The most recent judgment of the German Constitutional Court of 30 June 2009 re Lisbon Treaty defines the European Union as 'an association of sovereign national states (Staatenverbund)', headnote 1 in the translation by the BVerfG.
3. See W. v. Gerven, The European Union-A Polity of States and Peoples (2005).
4. See J.H.H. Weiler, The Constitution of Europe (1999), 185-187 particularly with regard to international relations where he also talks of 'mixity'!
5. Case 294/83 Les Verts v. European Parliament [1986] ECR 1339 para 1365; Opinion 1/91 on the European Economic Area [1991] ECR I-6079.
6. Joerges and Rödl, 'Von der Entformalisierung europäischer Poltik und dem Formalismus europäischer Rechtsprechung im Umgang mit dem "sozialen Defizit" des Integrationsprojekts', ZERP (Bremen) DP 2/2008,7-11: 'Kollisionsrecht als Form europäischer Verfassung'.
7. Case 120/78 Rewe Zentral v. Bundesmonopolverwaltung [1979] ECR 649.
8. Cases C-6-9/90 Francovich et al v. Republic of Italy [1991] ECR I-5357.
9. Reich, Understanding EU Law (2nd edn, 2005), 274-277.
10. [2003] OL L1.
11. Case 127/73 BRT v. Sabam [1974] ECR 313.
12. Case C-453/99 Courage v. Berhard Crehan [2001] ECR I-6297.
13. Cases C-295-298/04 Vicenzo Manfred et al v. Lloyd Adriatico Ass. [2006] ECR I-6619.
14. Micklitz, Reich and Rott, Understanding European Consumer Law (2008), at paras 8.3-8.11.
15. Reich, 'Procedural autonomy of Member States vs. effective legal protection in recent Court practice-On the way to procedural plurality', Liber amicorum, Mikelenas, 2008, 271.
16. See Commission Green Paper of 19 December 2005 COM(2005)672; White paper of 8 April 2008 COM(2008)165; for an overview see Basedow (ed.), Private Enforcement of EC Competition Law (2007); a critique has been voiced by Editorial comments, 'A little more action please', CMLRev (2008), 609.
17. 'Horizontal liability in EC Law-"Hybridisation" of remedies for compensation in case of breaches of EC rights', CMLRev (2007), 705.
18. Case 43/75 G. Defrenne v. SABENA [1976] ECR 455.
19. Case C-415/93 ASBL v. Bosman [1995] ECR I-4921, paras 83-85.
20. Case C-281/98 R. Angonese v. Casa di Risparmio de Bolzano [2000] ECR I-4139, paras 31-36.
21. Case C-438/05 International Transport Workers Federation (ITW) and Finnish Seamans Union (FSU) v. Viking Line [2007] ECR I-10779.
22. Case C-144/04 Werner Mangold v. Rüdiger Helm [2005] ECR I-9981.
23. Case C-267/06 Tadao Maruko v. Versorgungsanstalt der deutschen Bühnen [2008] ECR I-1757.
24. Steindorff, EG-Vertrag und Privatrecht (1996) at 48-50 (possibility of-mandatory-private law norms to restrict free movement).
25. Most recently Case C-212/04 K. Adeneler v. ELOG [2006] ECR I-6057 para 110.
26. Craig and de Burca, EU Law: Text, Cases and Materials (4th edn, 2007), 282-287 referring to a 'broad concept of the state' at 284.
27. J. Basedow, 'Grundsatz der Nichtdiskriminierung', Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht (ZEuP) 2008, 230.
28. Case C-265/95 [1997] ECR I-6959; for an extension as general principle see Riesenhuber, Europäisches Vertragsrecht (2003) at 41-46; 'Schutzpflichten' instead of 'Drittwirkung'!
29. Peter-Christian Müller-Graff and Rudolf Streinz, 'Art. 49', in EUV/EGV Kommentar, 2003, margins 65-69.
30. Case 36/74, Walrave v. Union Cycliste internationale [1974] ECR 1405 paras 15-19.
31. Above note 19.
32. See Reich, above note 17, at 707.
33. Above note 20.
34. Case C-309/99 J. C. J. Wouters et al/Algemene Raad von de Nederlandse Ordre van Advocaaten [2002] ECR, I-1577 para 120.
35. BVerfG 89, 214 = NJW 1994, 96; confirmed by later decisions of 5 August 1994, NJW 1994, 2749; 6 December 2005, WM 2006, 23.
36. For a detailed comment on this case law see P. Rott, 'German law on Family Suretyships: An Overrated System', in A. Colombi Ciacchi (ed.), Protection of Non-Professional Sureties in Europe: Formal and Substantive Disparity (2007), at 54-55.
37. Above note 21.
38. Case C-341/05 Laval & partneri v. Bygnadds [2007] ECR I-11767.
39. Above note 24 at 125, 143, 290, 299.
40. Cases 56 and 58/64 [1966] 299.
41. See my discussion of so-called penalty clauses (Vorfälligkeitsentschädigung) in mortgage credits in the case of early repayment because of mobility requirements: Reich, 'Die vorzeitige Beendigung von Finanzierungen aus der Sicht des Kreditnehmers, insbesondere der Verbraucher', Bankrechtstag (1996), 43, 57.
42. See Micklitz, Reich and Rott, Understanding, supra note 14 at para 8.14.
43. Reich, 'A European Contract Law, or a European Contract Law Regulation for Consumers?', Journal of Consumer Policy (JCP) (2005), 383 at 398.
44. Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91, [2004] OJ L46/1. Concerning EU competence see Case C-344/04 IATA and ELFAA v. Department for Transport [2006] ECR I-403; a critical overview has been given by E. and M. Varney, 'Grounded? Air Passenger Rights in the EU', in Twigg-Flesner et al., The Yearbook of Consumer Law 2008 (2007), 171. A similar Regulation (EC) 1371/2007 of 23 October 2007, [2007] OJ L315/14, concerns rail passengers' rights.
45. See the detailed analysis of Karsten, 'European Passenger Law for Sea and Inland Waterway Transport', in Twigg-Flesner et al., The Yearbook of Consumer Law 2008 (2007), at 201; ibid., 'Passenger, Consumers, and Travellers: The Rise of Passenger Rights in EC Transport Law and its Repercussion for Community Consumer Law and Policy', JCP (2007), 117.
46. C-549/07 Friedrike Wallentin-Hermann v. Alitalia [2008] ECR I-(22.12.2008).
47. [1985] OJ L15/16.
48. [1995] OJ L145/25.
49. [2002] OJ L203/30.
50. Case 10/86 VAG Magne [1986] ECR 4071 paras 12 and 16; confirmed by Case C-125/05 VW-Audi Forhandlersforeningen v. Skandinavisk Motor Co A/S [2006] ECR I-7637 para 56.
51. Reich, above note 17 at 721.
52. See Case C-126/97 ECO Swiss v. Benetton [1999] ECR I-3055 paras 36-37, referring to the 'ordre public quality' of the EC competition rules, which must be applied ex officio in recognition proceedings of an arbitration award similar to national law under the principle of equivalence.
53. Cases C-91/92 [1994] ECR I-3325 paras 20-25; C-168/95 Arcaro [1996] ECR I-4705 paras 40, 42; C-397/01 Pfeiffer [2004] ECR I-8835 para 108; see the discussion by Arnull, The European Union and its Court of Justice (2nd edn, 2006), at 244-246. Similar principles apply to Commission decisions: see Case C-80/06 Carp v. Econrad [2007] ECR I-4473.
54. For a different typology see Teubner, 'Societal Constitutionalism: Alternatives to State Centred Constitutional Theory?' in Joerges, Sand and Teubner (eds.), Transnational Governance and Constitutionalism (Oxford, 2004) at 18; Calliess, Grenzüberschreitende Verbraucherverträge (2006) at 196, relying on 'autonomous self-regulation' as a source of law; Michaels and Jansen, 'Private Law Beyond the State? Europeanisation, Globalisation, and Privatisation', American J Comp L (2006), 843; Basedow, 'The State's Private Law and the Economy-Commercial law as an Amalgam of Public and Private Rule-Making', Am J Comp L (2008), 703.
55. For an overview see Prechal, Directives in EC Law (2nd edn, 2005), at 255-261; v. Danwitz, 'Rechtswirkungen von Richtlinien in der neuen Rechtsprechung des EuGH', [2007] Juristenzeitung (JZ), 697; Dashwood, 'From an Duyn to Mangold via Marshall: Reducing Direct Effect to Absurdity?' 9 Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies (2006-2007), 81.
56. Case C-443/98 [2000] ECR I-7535; for a discussion see Craig and de Burca, EU Law, Text, Cases and Materials (4th edn, 2007), at 296-300 and Dashwood at 94 talk of 'incidental horizontal effect'; what is the difference from 'negative horizontal direct effect'?
57. Case C-194/94 CIA Security v. Signalson and Securitel [1996] ECR I-2201.
58. Cases C-240-244/98 Océano Group Ed. v. Rocio Murciano Quintero et al [2000] ECR I-4941.
59. See Reich, Understanding at 23; Prechal at 268; a critique has been voiced by Rörig, Die Direktwirkung von Richtlinien (2001) at 56-63, discussing the relevant case law of the ECJ; Dashwood, above note 55 at 103; v. Danwitz at 703 referring to the problem of filling the gaps left by eliminating a provision which is contrary to a directive. This is however not a specific problem of directives but generally one of the principles of precedence of EC law as enunciated in Simmenthal (below note 65).
60. [1999] OJ L171/12; denying 'Nutzungsentschädigung': Case C-404/06 Quelle v. BVVZ [2008] ECR I-2685.
61. See W. van Gerven, 'On Rights, Remedies and Procedures', CMLRev (2000), 501 at 506-509.
62. BGH, judgment of 26.11.2008, Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht (EuZw 2009, 155), using the theory of 'directive conforming interpretation' for a 'Rechtsfortbildung' by way of a 'teleological reduction' of the scope of application of non-conforming national law.
63. Case C-144/04 Werner Mangold v. Rüdiger Helm [2005] ECR I-9981; critiqued in Reich, [2006] Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht (EuZW), 21
64. [2000] OJ L303/16.
65. The case was concerned with the direct applicability of Art. 28 EC (then Art. 30 EEC) in conjunction with a specific EEC regulation in 'vertical' relations.
66. Case C-411/05, [2007] ECR I-8531; comment Reich [2007] EuZW 198.
67. Judgment of 16 Oct. 2007 at para 68, referring to the 'broad discretion of Member States in employment policy matters'; see comment by L. Waddington, CMLRev (2008), 895 at 904-905.
68. Above note 25 at para 121.
69. Above note 23.
70. Case C-555/07 Seda Küküdevici v. Sweden GmbH, opinion of AG Bot of 7 July 2009, paras 80/85, not yet available in English.
71. See Reich, Bürgerrechte in der EU (1999), 105-108.
72. Case C-262/88 Barber [1990] ECR I-1889 para 41; Case C-292/04 Meilicke [2007] ECR I-1835, paras 36-37.
73. See the very thorough opinion of AG Trstenjak of 15 November 2007, citing extensively the controversies in German literature, para 38.
74. Case C-306/06 01051 Telecom v. Deutsche Telecom [2008] I-(3.4.2008).
75. [2000] OJ L200/35.
76. Reich, 'Free Movement v. Social Rights in an Enlarged Union-the Laval and Viking Cases before the ECJ', [2008] German Law Journal, 125 at 160.
77. Tridimas, The General Principles of EU Law (2nd edn, 2006), at 59-64; Reich, above note 9 at 190-191; Basedow, above note 27 at 232.
78. Cases 117/76 and 16/77 Ruckdeschel [1977] ECR 1753 para 7; C-15/95, EARL de Kerlast v. Union régionale de coopératives agricoles (Unicopa) and Coopérative du Trieux [1997] ECR I-1961 para 35.
79. Case C-309/89 Codorniú SA v. Council [1994] ECR I-1853.
80. See the recent judgments with private law importance in the Laval and Viking cases, above notes 23 and 38, and in Case C-272/06 Productores de Música de Espana (Promusicae) v. Telefónica de Espana SAU [2008] ECR I-271, paras 62-63: need to balance between the right to effective protection of property (copyright) and the right of protection of personal data, and hence of private life, in civil litigation between a rights management society and internet providers concerning disclosure of user data of copyrighted music.
81. The ECJ had recognised the extension of the general principle of non-discrimination with regard to sex in its seminal Case C-25/02 Katharina Rinke v. Ärztekammer Hamburg [2003] ECR I-8349.
82. See Case 5/88 Wachauf v. Bundesamt für Ernährung [1989] ECR I-2609 para 19; a different opinion has been taken by Borowsky, in J. Meyer, Kommentar zur Charta (2005), Art. 51 para 14.
83. Basedow, above note 27 at 249 expressly rejects any horizontal direct effect of Art. 21 of the Charter.
84. Joined Cases C-92/92 and 326/92 [1993] ECR I-5145 concerning German copyright legislation which denied to authors and performers from other member countries the right to prohibit the marketing of phonograms manufactured without their consent where the performance was given outside its national territory.
85. Above note 27.
86. At 250.
87. Above note 22.
88. Basedow above note 27 at 242; further references in the opinion of AG Sharpston in Case C-427/06 [2008] B. Bartsch v. Bosch and Siemens (BSH) Altersfürsorge, ECR I-(23.9.2008) which concerned the compatibility of a so-called 'age-gap' clause in a pension scheme with primary (Art. 13) or secondary (Dir. 2000/78) Community law.
89. EuZW 2006, 21; 2007, 198.
90. Above note 66; Dashwood, above note 55 at 107.
91. Case C-249/96 Lisa Jacqueline Grant v. South-West Trains [1998] ECR I-621; the EU legislator reacted by way of Directive 2000/78; it is however not clear whether Grant would be decided differently: see Reich, above note 9 at 207.
92. Above note 88. Also in favour of Mangold the opinion of AG Bot of 7.7.2009 in Case C-555/07 Küküdevici, above note 70, paragraphs 77 and following.
93. Above note 27 at 236.
94. See Case C-13/05 Sonja Chacón Navas v. Eurest Colectividades [2006] ECR I-6467 para 43; the Court insisted 'that a person who has been dismissed by his employer solely on account of sickness does not fall within the general framework laid down for combating discrimination on grounds of disability by Directive 2000/78' (para 47).
95. Reich, above note 33 at 725.
96. Case C-353/06; see the opinion of AG Jacobs of 30 June 2005 in the preceding Case C-96/04 [2006] ECR 3561 where the ECJ however regarded the reference as inadmissible. In his earlier opinion of 9 December 1992 in Case C-168/01 Konstantinidis [1191], argued before the enactment of the citizenship concept in EU law, AG Jacobs pointed to the fundamental right of a person to his name as part of European citizenship: 'civis Europeus sum', at para 46; the Court argued with the somewhat artificial market aspects of distorting the spelling of a name which may create confusion with potential clients of Mr. Konstantinidis and therefore restrict nonproportionally his right to establishment.
97. Case C-148/02, [2003] ECR I-11613; for its importance on fundamental rights protection of economically inactive citizens see Elsmore and Starup, 'Union Citizenship-Background, Jurisprudence, and Perspective', [2007] YEL, 57 at 92.
98. For an overview see Schiek et al. (eds.), Non-discrimnation Law (2007), 11-14; Reich, above note 14 at 204-206. Basedow, above note 27 at 238 differentiates between a genuine 'prohibition of discrimination', which is not the formulation of the directives, and the need to 'combat discrimination', e.g. according to Art. 1 Dir. 2000/43; its Art. 2 (1) formulates that 'there shall be no direct or indirect discrimination based on race or ethnic origin'. Is the latter formula really a difference from a 'prohibition' stricto sensu? Otherwise the need for effective sanctions would not be understandable. Obviously, the Member States have a certain amount of discretion on how to implement this obligation.
99. [2000] OJ L180/22
100. [2004] OJ L373/37
101. [2004] OJ L16/44; the latter has not been discussed by Basedow.
102. Reich, above note 14 at 206; Schreier, 'Das Allgemeine Gleichbehandlungsgesetz-wirklich ein Eingriff in die Vertragsfreiheit?' [2007] KritJ, 278 at 285 referring to the somewhat misleading term in the implementing German legislation (AGG-Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz 2006) 'Massengeschäft' in contrast to 'individual transactions' where personal properties of the partner are important.
103. At 240.
104. Above note 24 at 303 ff.
105. Case C-54/07; Reich, [2008] EuZW, 229.
106. COM(2008)426 final.
107. Ross, 'Promoting Solidarity: From Public Service to a European Model of Competition?', CMLRev. (2007), 1057 at 1070, insisting on the applicability of the general norm of Art. 16 EC.
108. Consumer Policy strategy, COM(2002) para 3.1.5; also COM(2007)99 at 12: EU Consumer Policy Strategy 2007-2013.
109. Rott, 'Consumers and Services of General Interest: Is EC Consumer Law the Future?', [2007] JCP, 53; Reich, 'Crisis of Future of European Consumer Law?', Yearbook of Consumer Law 2008 (2009).
110. Dir. 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 2002 on universal service and users' rights relating to electronic communications, networks and services (Universal Services Directive) [2002] OJ L108/51.
111. Dir. 2003/54/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 26 June 2003 concerning Common Rules for the Internal Market for Electricity [2003] OJ L176/32.
112. Rott at 56; Micklitz, 'The Concept of Competitive Contract Law', Penn State (2005), 549 at 576; Ch. Willett, 'General Clauses on Fairness and the Promotion of Values Important in Services of General Interest', in Twigg-Flesner et al. (eds.), The Yearbook of Consumer Law 2007 (2008), 67 at 95-100.
113. [2007] OJ L319.
114. Micklitz, 'The Visible Hand of European Regulatory Private Law', EUI Working Papers Law 2008/14, at 16-18.
115. See Basedow, above note 27 at 246; Eidenmüller et al., above note 104 at 534; AG Sharpston in Bartsch, above note 88 at para 30.
116. Pakaluk, Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics: An Introduction (2005), at 195-196.
117. Basedow, above note 27: 'dem allgemeinen Diskriminierungsverbot (kommt) keine eigenständige operative Bedeutung im europäischen Privatrecht zu ... Seine Rolle ist die eines hermeneutischen Prinzips, welches das Verständnis des positiven Rechts erleichtert, weil es uns gestattet, einzelne Rechtsakte im Kontext zu sehen und auf ihre systematische Stimmigkeit zu prüfen. Ein eigener Regelungsgehalt kommt ihm nicht zu'.
118. Acquis Group (ed.), Principles of the Existing EC Contract Law (Acquis-Principles)-Contract I (2008); for a comment see Leible, 'Non-Discrimination', in Schulze (ed.), Common Frame of Reference and Existing EC Contract Law (2008), 127.
119. Study Group on a European Civil Code (ed.), Principles, Defintions and Model Rules of European Private Law (DCFR) (2008) (similar in the Outline Edition 2009); a critique has been voiced by Eidenmüller et al., 'Der Gemeinsame Referenzrahmen für das Europäische Privatrecht', [2008] JZ, 529 at 535 suggesting the inclusion of the non-discrimination rules of EC law in public rather than private law provisions, thus misunderstanding the impact of non-discrimination on freedom of contract and choice and the Sanktionsaufgabe of private law as developed by Steindorff, above note 104.
120. Reich [2008] JCP, 369; Schulze and Wilhelmsson, 'From the Draft Common Frame of Reference towards European Contract Law Rules' [2008] ERCL, 154 at 168; reservations with regard to extending them to freedom of association have been voiced by Basedow p. 242.
121. With regard to English law see the critical remarks by C. Twigg-Flesner, The Europeanisation of Contract Law (2008), at 133-138.
122. [2009] OJ L 211/55.