CYIL vol. 14 (2023)

CYIL 14 (2023) COMPARISON OF THE PROROGATION AGREEMENTS UNDER THE HAGUE CONVENTION… from the EU. All prorogation clauses that fall within the scope of the Convention and are concluded between EU entities and entities that are resident in the UK within the meaning of the Convention are covered by the Convention. The Convention carries precedence of the application over the Brussels I bis Regulation in these cases. In the context of de lege ferenda considerations, the author is of the opinion that the Brussels I bis Regulation should deal more explicitly in its wording with its relationship to the conventions adopted at the Hague Conference, to which the Union itself is a contracting party. It is also recommended that the Brussels I bis Regulation should include a provision which, also in the light of the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU, states that it is not precluded for a State or a public law body to act on one party, provided that the relationship falls within the scope of civil and commercial matters within the meaning of the Regulation. A final suggestion would be to define the term ‘in specific cases’, which in this author’s view is vague. On the Convention side, the author would clearly recommend the introduction of the possibility of subordination to jurisdiction as provided for in Brussels I bis, since there is no application of the Convention in the case of the Convention to protect the weaker party. In spite of the aforementioned, the author considers the provisions contained in the analysed sources to be extremely beneficial for legal certainty in international trade for all companies within the EU internal market, whether in intra-EU agreements or in legal relations with entities resident outside the EU in the Contracting States of the Convention. The author is of the opinion that the accession to the Convention of other important stakeholders of the international community would make international trade more efficient for businesses in these States and would strengthen their legal certainty.

439