Currently, many European countries, specifically those that are not members of the European Union (EU), have special conflict-of-laws rules governing the rules for the choice of law in private relations of protection against cross-border unfair competition. European countries with legislation enshrining separate conflict-of-laws rules with regardto civil offences relating to unfair competition include Switzerland, Liechtenstein, the Russian Federation, Albania, Macedonia, Moldova, and others. Not coincidentally, such rules are reflected in the provisions of the (EU) Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council “On the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (‘Rome II’)” which is currently applicable in all EU member States.

Unlike many States, in Ukraine’s legal system conflict-of-laws issues arising from unfair competition remain unregulated. The Law of Ukraine “On Private International Law” (PIL Law), as well as effective international treaties of our State, does not contain special conflict-of-laws rules with regard thereto. This clearly necessitates a detailed study of the European experience in regulating private relations of protection against unfair competition with a foreign element, with a view to finding out whether new conflict-oflaws approaches which are widely used in these foreign countries should be introduced into domestic legislative and judicial practice.

The purpose of the article is to identify specific features of special conflict-of-laws regulation of obligations arising from unfair competition in private international law of European countries, and also to formulate proposals and recommendations for improving domestic PIL Law in this domain.

 The article highlights specific features of special conflict-of-laws regulation of obligations arising as a result of unfair competition in private international law of certain European countries, and also formulates proposals and recommendations for improving PIL Law.

In particular, the author made a detailed analysis of the conflict-of-laws rules contained in article 6 of the Rome II Regulation, elaborated on the specific features of their interpretation and application via European doctrine and practice, and also compared the relevant rules with similar special conflict-of-laws rules contained in legislation of those European countries where Rome II does not apply.

The article highlights the main reasons for detailing the conflict-of-laws rules for the choice of law in relation to this category of torts in legislation of the vast majority of European countries, and also demonstrates the advantages and disadvantages of special rules on obligations arising from unfair competition contained in Rome II.

The author concludes that separate rules for the choice of law in respect of noncontractual obligations arising from unfair competition should be introduced into national legislation, and formulates the proposals and recommendations for improving national PIL Law in this area, by supplementing it with new article 501 regarding non-contractual obligations from unfair competition.

Bibliography

Authored books

1. Ashton D and Henry D, Competition Damages Actions in the EU: Law and Practice. (Edward Elgar Publishing 2013) (in English).

2. Binchy W and Ahern J, The Rome II Regulation on the Law Applicable to Non-Contractual Obligations: A New International Litigation Regime (Brill 2009) (in English).

3. Figura-Góralczyk E, Nieuczciwa konkurencja w prawie prywatnym międzynarodowym. (Wolters Kluwer Polska SA 2017) (in Polish).

4. Heinrich H and Nedim P and Schnyder A and Berti S, Internationales Privatrecht: Basler Kommentar (Helbing Lichtenhahn Verlag 2013) (in German).

5. Huber P, Rome II Regulation: Pocket Commentary (Sellier European Law Publishers 2011) (in English).

6. Kostkiewicz K, Internationales Privatrecht II: Vorlesungsskriptum <http://www.car2.de/ wp-content/uploads/downloads/skripte/IPRII.pdf> (accessed: 16.05.2020) (in German).

7. Maskaeva N, Nedobrosovestnaja konkurencija v mezhdunarodnom chastnom prave [Unfair Competition in Private International Law] (2016) (in Russian).

Edited and translated books

 8. Devenney J and Mel K (eds), European Consumer Protection: Theory and Practice (Cambridge University Press 2012) (in English).

9. Malatesta A (eds), Honorati C, The Law Applicable to Unfair Competition. The Unification of Choice of Law Rules on Torts and Other Non-contractual Obligations in Europe (CEDAM 2006) (in English).

10. Nuyts A (eds), International Litigation in Intellectual Property and Information Technology (Kluwer Law International 2008) (in English).

11. Stone P (eds), Research Handbook on EU Private International Law (Edward Elgar Publishing 2015) (in English).

12. Koh H and Magnus U and Morenfel’s V, Mezhdunarodnoe chastnoe pravo i sravnitel’noe pravovedenie [Private International Law and Comparative Law] (Mezhdunar otnoshenija 2001) (in Russian).

13. Sergeeva A (red), Kommentarij k Grazhdanskomu kodeksu Rossijskoj Federacii [Commentary on the Civil Code of the Russian Federation] (2-e izd, Prospekt 2016) (in Russian). Journal articles 14. Alférez F, ‘The Rome II Regulation: On the way towards a European Private International Law Code’ (2007) 3 The European Legal Forum 85, 86 (in English).

15. Bouček V, ‘Deliktni Statut i Nepošteno Trzišno Natjecanje u Uredbi Rim II’ (2012) 62 Zbornik Pravnog fakulteta u Zagrebu 53 (in Croatian).

16. De Boer Th, ‘Party Autonomy and Its Limitations in the Rome II Regulation’ (2007) 9 Yearbook of Private International Law 23 (in English).

17. Fitchen J, ‘Choice of law in International Claims Based on Restrictions of Competition: Article 6 (3) of the Rome II Regulation’ [2009] 5 (2) Journal of Private International Law 344 (in English).

18. Gonçalves A, ‘The Application of the Rome II Regulation on the Internet Torts’ (2013) 7 Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology 46 (in English).

19. Hellner M, ‘Unfair Competition and Acts Restricting Free Competition. A Commentary on Article 6 of the Rome II Regulation’ (2007) 9 Yearbook of Private International Law 54, 57 (in English).

20. Leistner M, ‘Comments: The Rome II Regulation Proposal and its Relation to the European Country-of-Origin Principle’ (2005) 24 Intellectual Property and Private International Law: Heading for the Future 182 (in English).

21. Rohová I and Sehnálek D, ‘Determining Jurisdiction and the Applicable Law in CrossBorder Unfair Competition and Unfair Commercial Practices’ [2017] 9 (1) Lexonomica 27, 28 (in English).

22. Stone P, ‘The Rome II Regulation on Choice of Law in Tort’ (2007) 4 Ankara Law Review 123 (in English).

23. Wadlow C, ‘The New Private International Law of Unfair Competition and The ‘Rome II’ Regulation’ [2009] 4 (11) Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 794 (in English).

24. Abrosimova E, ‘Vnedogovornye objazatel’stva v MChP i kosvennaja avtonomija voli’ [‘Non-Contractual Obligations in Private International Law and Indirect Autonomy of Will’] (2016) 6 Pravo i jekonomika 59–61 (in Russian).

25. Manuyilova K, ‘Unifikaciia koliziinykh norm, shho zastosovuiutsia do pozadohovirnykh zobov’iazan’ [‘Unification of Conflict-of-Law Rules Applicable to Non-Contractual Obligations’] (2011) 62 Aktual. probl. derzhavy i prava 461 (in Ukrainian).

26. Voznesenskij N, ‘K voprosu ob unifikacii kollizionnogo prava v ES. Pravo, primenimoe v sfere zashhity ot nedobrosovestnoj konkurencii’ [‘On the Issue of Unification of Conflict of Law in the EU. Law Applicable in the Field of Protection Against Unfair Competition’] (2008) 6 Hoz-vo i pravo: Aktual. vopr. mezhdunar. i mezhdunar. chastn. prava. Prilozhenie k ezhemes. jurid. zhurn. 15 (in Russian).

Theses

27. Voznesenskij N, ‘Objazatel’stva vsledstvie nedobrosovestnoj konkurencii v mezhdunarodnom chastnom prave [‘Obligations Due to Unfair Competition in Private International Law’] (dys kand yurid, 2008) (in Russian).