Bibliografía (Artículo doctrinal)

The Choice-of-Law Rules of the European Community Regulation on the Law Applicable to Non-Contractual Obligations: Simple and Predictable, Consequences-Based, or Neither?
RUSSELL J. WEINTRAUB (Professor of Law and holder of the Powell Chair Emeritus, University of Texas School of Law)
Texas International Law Journal, vol. 43 (2008), núm. 3.

En su plan de trabajo, el autor señala: "There is now an extensive law-and-economics literature devoted to choice of law. Sections II and III summarize this economics approach to drafting conflicts rules and evaluate Rome II under this perspective. Sections IV and V outline a consequences-based approach to choice-of-law and appraise the extent to which Rome II is consistent with this methodology."

Las Conclusiones a las que llega el autor son las siguientes:

"Rome II provides reasonably foreseeable answers to choice-of-law issues. The various exceptions to the regulation‘'s rules create the major predictability problems: (1) the cryptic "more closely connected" exception that appears in the general rule of article 4 and in several other articles, (2) the "public policy" exception of article 26, and (3) the "mandatory provisions" exception of article 16. The uncertainty caused by these exceptions can be alleviated by (1) replacing the "more closely connected" language with a reference to the country that will experience the consequences if its law is not applied (2) providing that if a court refuses on "public policy" grounds to apply the law that Rome II selects, the court is not to seize this excuse to apply its own law, but is to dismiss without affecting the plaintiff'‘s ability to sue elsewhere and (3) giving some guidance as to what can qualify as internationally "mandatory" forum law.

The common residence exception to application of the law of the place of damage is partially, but insufficiently, consequences oriented. Rome II gets high marks for including time limitations and burden of proof within the scope of its rules. If it is to achieve its main purpose of making the result independent of the forum, Rome II should clearly indicate that quantification of damages is also within its scope."

Notas:
-Véase el texto completo del artículo.
-Sobre el artículo véase también la página web de Conflict of Laws .net.