Agreement on the Right to Choose the Court: Peculiarities of Legal Regulation and Case-Law
Summary: 1. Introduction. – 2. Choice Of Court by the Parties to the Dispute. General Approaches to the Choice of Court Agreement. – 3. Form of Expression of the Choice of Court Agreement. – 4. Peculiarities Of Choice of Court Agreement Form: Ukrainian Experience. – 5. Derogation From the Agreement. – 6. Conclusion.
Background: The present article provides a detailed analysis of legislative regulation—both national and international—and case-law concerning the choice of court in cross-border disputes. In international business relations, the issue of which jurisdictional body that have jurisdiction over potential future disputes often arises. In addressing this subject, the authors meticulously unravel the intricate issues surrounding the application of the forum selection agreement, including issues related to derogation from such an agreement and the imposition of liability for actions taken in breach of it. A significant portion of the analysis is dedicated to examining the doctrinal approaches and court practices of Ukraine, which is in the nascent stages of introducing 'contractual mechanisms' for choosing a court. Furthermore, an analysis of case law from the Court of Justice of the European Union, and national courts of European countries reveals the absence of uniform approaches to this issue.
Methods: The study employed analytical, normative and comparative methods. The method of statutory research is used to characterise the statutory instruments relating to the procedure for selecting a competent court and the specifics of an exclusive agreement. In addition, the comparative method is reflected in the study of international and national legal regulation of the choice of court that will be authorised to hear cross-border disputes. By choosing the method of legal analysis and synthesis, the author provides a reasonable assessment of the case law of both national courts of the European Union, Ukraine, and the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Results and Conclusions: According to the research, the authors determine that utilising the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements by parties in foreign economic relations will, firstly, enhance the objectivity of resolving disputes between the parties, and secondly, bolster and advance the global business community.
Abstract
Background: The present article provides a detailed analysis of legislative regulation—both national and international—and case-law concerning the choice of court in cross-border disputes. In international business relations, the issue of which jurisdictional body that have jurisdiction over potential future disputes often arises. In addressing this subject, the authors meticulously unravel the intricate issues surrounding the application of the forum selection agreement, including issues related to derogation from such an agreement and the imposition of liability for actions taken in breach of it. A significant portion of the analysis is dedicated to examining the doctrinal approaches and court practices of Ukraine, which is in the nascent stages of introducing 'contractual mechanisms' for choosing a court. Furthermore, an analysis of case law from the Court of Justice of the European Union, and national courts of European countries reveals the absence of uniform approaches to this issue.
Methods: The study employed analytical, normative and comparative methods. The method of statutory research is used to characterise the statutory instruments relating to the procedure for selecting a competent court and the specifics of an exclusive agreement. In addition, the comparative method is reflected in the study of international and national legal regulation of the choice of court that will be authorised to hear cross-border disputes. By choosing the method of legal analysis and synthesis, the author provides a reasonable assessment of the case law of both national courts of the European Union, Ukraine, and the Court of Justice of the European Union.
About Authors
Iryna Malinovska *
Cand. of Science of Law (Equiv. Ph.D.), Assist. Prof. at Civil Law Department, Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University, Ukraine
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5945-2042
Co-author, responsible for conceptualization, formal analysis, validation, writing-original draft.
Liudmyla Leiba
Ph.D., Assoc. Prof. at the Department of Land Law and Agriculture Law, Academic Secretary of Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University, Ukraine.
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1669-3409
Corresponding author, responsible for research methodology, data curation, investigation, writing-original draft.
Viktoriia Panchenko
Cand. of Science of Law (Equiv. Ph.D.), Associate Professor of Private International Law and Comparative Law Department, Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University, Ukraine.
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9348-4547
Co-author, responsible for research methodology, data curation, investigation, writing- original draft.
Iryna Cherevatenko
Cand. of Science of Law (Equiv. Ph.D.), Associate Professor of Civil Justice and Advocacy Department, Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University, Ukraine.
i.m.cherevatenko@nlu.edu.ua
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2937-1529
Co-author, responsible for research methodology, data curation, investigation, writing- original draft.
Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Disclaimer: The authors declare that their opinion and views expressed in this manuscript are free of any impact of any organizations.
Rights and Permissions
© 2025 Iryna Malinovska, Liudmyla Leiba, Viktoriia Panchenko and Iryna Cherevatenko. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
References
1. Ahmed M, The Nature and Enforcement of Choice of Court Agreements : A Comparative Study (Hart Publishing 2020) 3-5.
2. Avraham-Giller S, ‘The Court’s Discretionary Power to Enforce Valid Jurisdiction Clauses: Time for a Change?’ (2022) 18(2) Journal of Private International Law 209, doi:10.1080/17441048.2022.2101189.
3. Brand RA, ‘United States Signs the Hague Judgments Convention’ (Transnational Litigation Blog, 31 March 2022) <https://tlblog.org/united-states-signs-the-hague-judgments-convention/> accessed 20 February 2025.
4. Buxbaum HL, ‘The Interpretation and Effect of Permissive Forum Selection Clauses Under US Law’ (2018) 66(1) The American Journal of Comparative Law 127, doI:10.1093/ajcl/avy013.
5. Coyle JF and Richardson KC, ‘Enforcing Inbound Forum Selection Clauses in State Court’ (2021) 53 Arizona State Law Journal 65, doi:10.2139/ssrn.3691233.
6. Evans AE, ‘M/S Bremen and Unterweser Reederei, GMBH v Zapata Off-Shore Co 40 USLW 4672’ (1972) 66(4) American Journal of International Law 864, doi:10.2307/2198518.
7. Garimella SR and Sooksripaisarnkit P, ‘Jurisdiction under the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements: A Critique’ (2017) 57(3-4) The Indian journal of international law 309, doi:10.1007/s40901-018-0081-z.
8. Hartley T and Dogauchi M, ‘Explanatory Report on the 2005 Hague Choice of Court Agreements Convention’ (Hague Conference on Private International Law, 8 November 2013) <https://www.hcch.net/en/publications-and-studies/details4/?pid=3959> accessed 20 February 2025.
9. Hay P, ‘Forum Selection Clauses–Procedural Tools or Contractual Obligations? Conceptualization and Remedies in American and German Law’ (2021) 35(1) Emory International Law Review 1 <https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/eilr/vol35/iss1/1> accessed 20 February 2025.
10. Izarova I and others, ‘Case Management in Ukrainian Civil Justice: First Steps Ahead’ (2022) 40 Cuestiones Políticas 927, doi:10.46398/cuestpol.4072.56.
11. Kravtsov S, ‘The definitive device of the term “international commercial arbitration”’ (2022) 12(3) Juridical Tribune 346, doi:10.24818/TBJ/2022/12/3.03.
12. Kusumadara A, ‘Jurisdiction of Courts Chosen in the Parties’ Choice of Court Agreements: An Unsettled Issue in Indonesian Private International Law and the Way-Out’ (2022) 18(3) Journal of private international law 424, doi:10.1080/17441048.2022.2148905.
13. Monestier TJ, ‘When Forum Selection Clauses Meet Choice of Law Clauses’ (2019) 69(2) American University Law Review 325.
Reviews for article
Add a Review
АНОТАЦІЯ УКРАЇНСЬКОЮ МОВОЮ
Тематичне дослідження
УГОДА ПРО ПРАВО ВИБОРУ СУДУ: ОСОБЛИВОСТІ ПРАВОВОГО РЕГУЛЮВАННЯ ТА СУДОВОЇ ПРАКТИКИ
Ірина Маліновська, Людмила Лейба, Вікторія Панченко та Ірина Череватенко
АНОТАЦІЯ
Вступ. У цій статті подано детальний аналіз законодавчого регулювання – як національного, так і міжнародного – та судової практики щодо вибору суду в транскордонних спорах. У міжнародних ділових відносинах часто виникає питання про те, який орган має юрисдикцію щодо потенційних майбутніх спорів. Розглядаючи цю тему, автори ретельно розкривають складні питання, пов'язані із застосуванням угоди про вибір суду, зокрема питання, пов'язані з відхиленням від такої угоди та покладенням відповідальності за їїпорушення. Значна частина аналізу присвячена вивченню доктринальних підходів та судової практики України, яка перебуває на початковій стадії впровадження «договірних механізмів» вибору суду. Крім того, аналіз судової практики Суду Європейського Союзу та національних судів європейських країн показує відсутність єдиних підходів до цього питання.
Методи. У дослідженні використовувалися аналітичний, нормативний та порівняльний методи. Метод законодавчого дослідження використовується для характеристики нормативних актів, що стосуються процедури вибору компетентного суду та особливостей виключної угоди. Крім того, порівняльний метод було застосовано у дослідженні міжнародного та національного правового регулювання вибору суду, який буде уповноважений розглядати транскордонні спори. Обираючи метод правового аналізу та синтезу, автор надає обґрунтовану оцінку судової практики як національних судів Європейського Союзу, України, так і Суду Європейського Союзу.
Результати та висновки. Згідно з дослідженням, автори визначають, що використання Гаазької конвенції про угоди про вибір суду сторонами у зовнішньоекономічних відносинах, по-перше, підвищить об'єктивність вирішення спорів між сторонами, а по-друге, зміцнить та розвине світову бізнес-спільноту.
Ключові слова: вибір суду, угода, Гаазька конвенція про угоди про вибір суду, виключна угода.
Publication history
-
Date of submission: 24 Feb 2025Date of acceptance: 05 May 2025
Online First publication: 12 Jun 2025
Last Publication: 17 Aug 2025
Whether the manuscript was fast tracked? - No
Number of reviewer report submitted in first round: 2 reports
Number of revision rounds: 1 round with minor revisions
Technical tools were used in the editorial process:
Plagiarism checks - Turnitin from iThenticate https://www.turnitin.com/products/ithenticate/
Scholastica for Peer Review https://scholasticahq.com/law-reviews
How to cite it?
-
Malinovska I, Leiba L, Panchenko V and Cherevatenko I, ‘Agreement on the Right to Choose theCourt: Peculiarities of Legal Regulation and Case-Law’ (2025) 8(3) Access to Justice in Eastern
Europe 541-57 <https://doi.org/10.33327/AJEE-18-8.3-c000109>
DOI https://doi.org/10.33327/AJEE-18-8.3-c000109
Managing editor – Mag. Bohdana Zahrebelna.Section Editor: Serhii Kravtsov.
English Editor – Julie Bold. Ukrainian language editor: Lilia Hartman.
