论文部分内容阅读
本文探讨的是欧盟私法日益增多背景下欧洲法院在私法领域的重要性。同时,本文试图解释私法先决程序(referral procedure,vorabentscheidungsverfahren)的角色转换和欧盟私法支离破碎的特征。欧盟法分散的特点导致欧洲判例法显得很不确定甚至自相矛盾。本文将用《布鲁塞尔条约》、对消费者合同中不公平条款的司法审查以及非物质损害赔偿中的例子来证明这一点。《欧洲合同法原则》和《共同参考框架》在一定程度上满足了对欧洲私法基本原则的需求。就刚才提到的那些例子而言,这两份文件都提供了原则层面的、值得推荐给欧洲法院参考的解决方案。本文的最后一部分讨论的问题是:欧洲法院以目前的形式能否胜任一个拥有五亿人口的联盟的民事司法工作。由于仍应坚持审判庭的组成人员来自不同国家的状况,因此可以考虑在综合法院(the General Court)——也就是此前的一审法院——的层面实现欧洲法院的去中心化。
This article explores the importance of the European Court of Justice in the field of private law in the context of the growing EU private law. At the same time, this article attempts to explain the role conversion of private referral procedure (vorabentscheidungsverfahren) and the fragmentation of EU private law. The fragmentation of EU law has led to the European case law that appears to be very uncertain or even contradictory. This article will demonstrate this with examples from the Brussels Treaty, judicial review of unfair terms in consumer contracts, and non-material damages. The Principles of European Contract Law and the Common Frame of Reference, to some extent, satisfy the need for the basic principles of private law in Europe. In the cases just mentioned, both documents provide a solution at the principle level that is worthy of reference to the European Court of Justice. The final part of the paper discusses the question of whether the European Court of Justice can be competent in the current form of civil justice for a coalition of 500 million people. Since the composition of the tribunals should still be adhered to by the conditions of different countries, the European Court of Decency could be considered decentralized at the level of the General Court, which was the earlier court of first instance.