New publications by Peter Arnt Nielsen

Peter Arnt Nielsen has recently published the following articles:

The New Brussels I Regulation

Common Market Law Review 2013, pp. 503-528.

The most important amendments to the Brussels I Regulation adopted on 12 December 2012 are presented and discussed. The author was a member of the Danish delegation to the negotiations. The amendments concern: 1) arbitration, 2) external situations, 3) choice-of-court agreements, and 4) abolition of exequatur. Compared to the Commission’s ambitions, only modest, but probably useful compromises were achieved in respect of arbitration and external situations. For exclusive choice-of-court agreements, an efficient and sophisticated provision based on the Commission’s ideas was adopted, and the Commission’s primary goal, to abolish exequatur, was also successfully achieved.

Libel Tourism: English and EU Private International Law

Journal of Private International Law, 2013, pp. 269-288.

The author deals with libel tourism, which is much related to the UK. A mixture of factors, such as the law applicable, national and European rules of jurisdiction, national choice of law rules, and case law of the ECJ cause the phenomenon. These issues as well as aspects of recognition and enforcement of libel judgments in the US and EU are examined. Proposals for reform and legislative action in the EU are made. The effect of the Defamation Act 2013 on libel tourism, in which the UK attempts to strike a better balance between freedom of expression and privacy and to deal with libel tourism, is examined.

Exclusive Choice of Court Agreements and Parallel Proceedings

Published in “A Commitment to Private International Law: Essays in Honour of Hans van Loon.” 2013, pp. 409-420.

In this Liber Amicorum to the former Secretary General of the Hague Conference for Private International Law, the author deals with exclusive choice of court agreements and parallel proceedings. Such agreements are regulated in both the Hague Choice of Court Convention from 2005 and the Brussels I Regulation of 2000. The former instrument governs exclusive choice of court agreements in a global context, whereas the latter does so in a European context. Although the two instruments pursue the same aim, parallel proceedings are regulated differently in the two instruments. The solution to the issue of “Italian Torpedoes”, agreed in the New Brussels I Regulation from 2012, is analyzed and discussed. It is proposed that this solution could be applied in a global context.