欧盟国际私法渊源与欧盟法院判例中的惯常居住概念:功能方法与严格文本主义

Radmila Dragišić
{"title":"欧盟国际私法渊源与欧盟法院判例中的惯常居住概念:功能方法与严格文本主义","authors":"Radmila Dragišić","doi":"10.5937/zrpfn1-37590","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The concept of habitual residence is an important connecting factor in contemporary EU Private International Law (EU PIL). In this paper, the author examines this concept through content analysis and comparative analysis of selected sources of EU PIL and the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The author inevitably refers to the Regulations Rome I and Rome II, which provide a conceptual definition of habitual residence of legal and natural persons (in the context of performing economic activities). Unlike the sources of law pertaining to personal status, these Regulations did not leave the concept of habitual residence indefinite. The author underscores the importance of recitals from the acquis corpus. Being part of the preamble of the sources of EU law, they serve as basic guidelines for the Court of Justice when providing guidance to national courts on criteria for determining what is to be considered a habitual residence in different situations. The author further points out to the positions taken by the Court of Justice in its judgments in cases C-80/19 and C-289/20, regarding the possibility of disposing of multiple habitual residences, as well as the position taken in the judgment of 27 April 2016 in case C -528/14 on the question of whether a natural person can simultaneously have a habitual residence in an EU Member State and in a third country. In the final remarks, the author presents key considerations on the functional approach to this concept in view of ensuring an autonomous, uniform and consistent definition.","PeriodicalId":192224,"journal":{"name":"Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta Nis","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The concept of habitual residence in selected sources of EU private international law and jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union: Functional approach versus strict textualism\",\"authors\":\"Radmila Dragišić\",\"doi\":\"10.5937/zrpfn1-37590\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The concept of habitual residence is an important connecting factor in contemporary EU Private International Law (EU PIL). In this paper, the author examines this concept through content analysis and comparative analysis of selected sources of EU PIL and the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The author inevitably refers to the Regulations Rome I and Rome II, which provide a conceptual definition of habitual residence of legal and natural persons (in the context of performing economic activities). Unlike the sources of law pertaining to personal status, these Regulations did not leave the concept of habitual residence indefinite. The author underscores the importance of recitals from the acquis corpus. Being part of the preamble of the sources of EU law, they serve as basic guidelines for the Court of Justice when providing guidance to national courts on criteria for determining what is to be considered a habitual residence in different situations. The author further points out to the positions taken by the Court of Justice in its judgments in cases C-80/19 and C-289/20, regarding the possibility of disposing of multiple habitual residences, as well as the position taken in the judgment of 27 April 2016 in case C -528/14 on the question of whether a natural person can simultaneously have a habitual residence in an EU Member State and in a third country. In the final remarks, the author presents key considerations on the functional approach to this concept in view of ensuring an autonomous, uniform and consistent definition.\",\"PeriodicalId\":192224,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta Nis\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta Nis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5937/zrpfn1-37590\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta Nis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5937/zrpfn1-37590","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

惯常居所概念是当代欧盟国际私法的一个重要衔接因素。在本文中,作者通过内容分析和比较分析欧盟公益诉讼的选定来源和欧盟法院(CJEU)的判例来检验这一概念。发件人不可避免地提到《罗马一号条例》和《罗马二号条例》,这两项条例对(在进行经济活动的情况下)法人和自然人的经常居所作了概念性定义。与有关个人地位的法律渊源不同,这些条例并没有对经常居住地的概念作出无限期的规定。作者强调了从习得语料中背诵的重要性。作为欧盟法律渊源序言的一部分,它们作为法院的基本准则,为各国法院在不同情况下确定惯常居所的标准提供指导。提交人进一步指出,法院在C-80/19和C-289/20号案件的判决中就处理多个惯常居所的可能性所采取的立场,以及2016年4月27日在C -528/14号案件中就自然人是否可以同时在欧盟成员国和第三国拥有惯常居所的问题所采取的立场。在最后的评论中,作者提出了关于这一概念的功能方法的关键考虑,以确保一个自主、统一和一致的定义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The concept of habitual residence in selected sources of EU private international law and jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union: Functional approach versus strict textualism
The concept of habitual residence is an important connecting factor in contemporary EU Private International Law (EU PIL). In this paper, the author examines this concept through content analysis and comparative analysis of selected sources of EU PIL and the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The author inevitably refers to the Regulations Rome I and Rome II, which provide a conceptual definition of habitual residence of legal and natural persons (in the context of performing economic activities). Unlike the sources of law pertaining to personal status, these Regulations did not leave the concept of habitual residence indefinite. The author underscores the importance of recitals from the acquis corpus. Being part of the preamble of the sources of EU law, they serve as basic guidelines for the Court of Justice when providing guidance to national courts on criteria for determining what is to be considered a habitual residence in different situations. The author further points out to the positions taken by the Court of Justice in its judgments in cases C-80/19 and C-289/20, regarding the possibility of disposing of multiple habitual residences, as well as the position taken in the judgment of 27 April 2016 in case C -528/14 on the question of whether a natural person can simultaneously have a habitual residence in an EU Member State and in a third country. In the final remarks, the author presents key considerations on the functional approach to this concept in view of ensuring an autonomous, uniform and consistent definition.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信