Abstract
In Greek Private International Law conflict of laws rules are of obligatory nature and foreign law is considered as jus to be applied ex officio, as provided for in Article 337 of the Code of Civil Procedure as well as in Article 144 (4) of the Code of Administrative Procedure. It is also admitted that the courts and other authorities, may use any means which is considered appropriate for acquiring knowledge of foreign law, usually a written information provided by the Hellenic Institute of International and Foreign Law. The application of both the conflict of laws rules and foreign law is subjected to the review of the higher courts. The solution prevailing regarding proceedings where the applicable foreign law could not be proved, is the application of the lex fori.
The improvement of the access to foreign law is of great importance for the international harmony pursued by conflict of laws system. The best way to make some progress in this direction is the use of new technologies and the international cooperation on the exchange of information about national laws. To the contrary modifying the status of foreign law in the sense that its applicability must depend exclusively on the parties’ decision would be in principle a serious threat to the legal system’s unity and the equality of parties. More useful is the unification of rules relative to the treatment of foreign law as a way to ensure the international harmony in the sphere of Private International Law.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
N. Davrados, The control by the Supreme Court of the application of the conflict of law rule, in Essays in honour of Spyridon Vl. Vrellis (2014) pp. 185–200 (in Greek), D. Evrigenis, Application of Foreign Law (1956) (in Greek), A. Grammatikaiki-Alexiou, Problems of Application of Foreign Law, especially in the Procedure of Issuing Certificates of Inheritance, Harmenopoulos 1976 pp. 527–540 (in Greek), E. Michelakis, Custom and Foreign Law as object of Proof, in Mélanges G. Streit vol. II (1963) pp. 253–268 (in Greek), C. Pamboukis, The Judicial Knowledge of Foreign Law, in Mélanges en l’honneur d’E. Krispis (1995) pp. 297–340 (in Greek), K. Rokas, in Institut Suisse de Droit Comparé The Application of Foreign Law in Civil Matters in the EU States and its Perspectives for the Future (2011) Part I Legal Analysis pp. 209–228 [http://ec.europa.eu/justice/civil/files/foreign_law_en.pdf] (in French), E. Vassilakakis, Judicial Review of Constitutionality of Foreign Law, in Charistiria Ioani Deliyani (1992) pp. 443–464 (in Greek), E. Vassilakakis/V. Kourtis, in C. Esplugues/J.L. Iglesias/G. Palao (eds.), Application of Foreign Law (2011) pp. 201–212, Sp. Vrellis, La preuve du droit applicable étranger, Koinodikion 1996 pp. 255–276.
- 2.
Technically speaking there is no exception regarding the obligatory nature of the conflict of laws rules in cases where a legal issue is subjected to another type Private International Law rules (such as lois de police) or to another method (such the method of recognition). In these cases it is not the nature of the conflict of laws rules which is affected but their applicability.
- 3.
See Article 33 of the Greek Civil Code (“The provisions of a foreign law shall not apply if the application thereof is contrary to morality or in general to public policy”).
- 4.
Sp. Vrellis, The ordre public clause in the Greek case law on adoption, RHDI 64 (2011) pp. 157–182.
- 5.
L. 4332/2015 Article 1a.
- 6.
K. Rokas, in Institut Suisse de Droit Comparé The Application of Foreign Law in Civil Matters in the EU States and its Perspectives for the Future (2011) Part I Legal Analysis pp. 210–211.
- 7.
P. Lagarde, Le principe de proximité dans le droit international privé contemporain. Cours général de droit international privé RCADI 196 (1986) pp. 9–238 (in French).
- 8.
This obligation is not without time limitation: according to case law, the parties have no right to propose the facts imposing the application of a foreign law and the subsequent court’s obligation to proceed to the relevant research for the first time before the Supreme Court (Supreme Court 131/2012, NOMOS Legal Database, Court of Appeal of Piraeus 852/2013, NOMOS Legal Database).
- 9.
P. Lazaratos, Administrative Procedural Law (2013) p. 878–879 (in Greek), Ch. Chryssanthakis (ed.) Administrative Procedure – A Commentary on Greek Legislation of Administrative Procedure (2015) p. 450–451 (in Greek), E. Vassilakakis/V. Kourtis, in C. Esplugues/J.L. Iglesias/G. Palao (eds.), Application of Foreign Law p. 203. See in this sense Administrative Court of Appeal of Athens 1590/2014, Δ/νη (Justice) 2014 p. 1750].
- 10.
T. Papadopoulou, The role of the forum’s judge in Private International Law (2000) p. 30 (in Greek).
- 11.
Multi-Member Court of First Instance of Syros 8/2013, NOMOS Legal Database [http://lawdb.intrasoftnet.com/nomos/nomos_frame.html].
- 12.
E. Vassilakakis/V. Kourtis, in C. Esplugues/J.L. Iglesias/G. Palao (eds.), Application of Foreign Law p. 205.
- 13.
One-Member Court of First Instance of Thebes 296/1990, Δ (Dike) 23 p. 258, One-Member Court of First Instance of Piraeus 788/1993, ΕΝΔ (Maritime Law Review) 1993 p. 332, One-Member Court of First Instance of Cephalonia, 468/2000, Δ (Dike) 2001 p. 759, One-Member Court of First Instance of Piraeus 56/2009 NOMOS legal data base, One-Member Court of First Instance of Thessaloniki 17765/2010, NOMOS Legal Database.
- 14.
Sp. Vrellis, Private International Law (2008)3 pp. 118–119 (in Greek).
- 15.
E. Vassilakakis/V. Kourtis, in C. Esplugues/J.L. Iglesias/G. Palao (eds.), Application of Foreign Law p. 205.
- 16.
Court of Appeal of Thessaloniki 154/2010, ΕΠολΔ (Civil Procedure Review) 2011 p. 106, Administrative Court of Appeal of Athens 1590/2014, Court of Appeal of Athens 428/2009 (NOMOS Legal Database), Court of Appeal of Piraeus 852/2013, ΔΕΕ (Law of Business Establishments and Companies) 2013 p. 1192.
- 17.
D. Evrigenis, The problem of the knowledge of the applicable foreign law and the legal information given by the Hellenic Institute for International and Foreign Law, EEAN (Journal of Greek and Foreign Jurisprudence) 1957 pp. 224–236 (in Greek).
- 18.
Until the information is provided the court must suspend the procedure (Court of Appeal of Piraeus 428/2099, Court of First Instance of Athens 41/2010, Council of State 2866/2012, NOMOS Legal Database, Court of Appeal of Piraeus 852/2013, Administrative Court of Appeal of Athens1580/2014).
- 19.
Piraeus Court of Appeal 480/2014, available in NOMOS Legal Database.
- 20.
See however a Supreme Court’s decision (1577/2010, NOMOS legal database), in which the applicable Albanian law provided for no solution about the reparation of moral prejudice. The Court decided to proceed to the application by analogy of some other provision of the foreign lex causae. One could think that such an approach, if possible, is better, because in this way, i.e. by avoiding the application of the lex fori, we are able to ensure the international harmony. As fascinating as this thought may be, the question still remains whether the aforementioned solution “belongs” really to the foreign law or is it an ad hoc solution of the lex fori.
- 21.
Court of Appeal of Piraeus 275/2012, One-Member Court of First Instance of Thebes 4/2014, NOMOS Legal Database.
- 22.
E. Vassilakakis/V. Kourtis, in C. Esplugues/J.L. Iglesias/G. Palao (eds.), Application of Foreign Law p. 208.
- 23.
Sp. Vrellis, Private International Law p. 119.
- 24.
Supreme Court 581/2010, ΕΕμπΔ (Review of Commercial Law) 2011 p. 142, Supreme Court 521/2010, ΕΕμπΔ (Review of Commercial Law) 2011 p. 146.
- 25.
No sanction is, on the contrary, imposed for court’s errors as to the research of the content of the applicable foreign law (Supreme Court 581/2010). In theory this position is criticized on the ground that she is contrary to the letter and the spirit of Article 337 of the Code of Civil Procedure, especially in cases where the court has obviously made no effort to discover the foreign law’s content [A. Grammatikaki-Alexiou/Z. Papassiopi-Passia/E. Vassilakakis, Private International Law (2013)5 p. 83 (in Greek)].
- 26.
E. Vassilakakis/V. Kourtis, in C. Esplugues/J.L. Iglesias/G. Palao (eds.), Application of Foreign Law p. 204.
- 27.
E. Spiliotopoulos, Treaty of Administrative Law (2011)14 pp. 87–91 (in Greek).
- 28.
P. Kinsch, Le fait du prince Ă©tranger (1994) (in French).
- 29.
A. Mantakou, The Misadventures of the Principle Jura Novit Curia in International Arbitration – A Practitioner’s Approach, in Essays in honour of Spyridon Vl. Vrellis (2014) pp. 557–568 (where further bibliography).
- 30.
Chr. Seraglini, L’arbitrage commercial international, in J. Béguin/M. Menjucq (eds.), Droit du commerce international (2011) pp. 947 et seq.
- 31.
For the procedural aspects of arbitrations see P. Mayer, “L’autonomie de l’arbitre international dans l’appréciation de sa propre compétence,” in Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, Vol. 217, Part V (1989).
- 32.
It is to be noted that according to A. Mantakou (Essays in honour of Spyridon Vl. Vrellis pp. 567–568) regarding the arbitration “the principle Jura Novit Curia seems to gradually take the shape of “Jura non Novit Curia”. It follows that arbitrators depend on the parties’ wishes as to the law applicable and its status.
- 33.
Decision No 568/2009/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of the 18 June 2009 amending Council Decision 2001/470/EC establishing a European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters.
- 34.
Ratified by the l. 593/1977.
- 35.
Ratified by the l. 1709/1987.
- 36.
C. Pamboukis, The Judicial Knowledge of Foreign Law pp. 325–326.
- 37.
Greece has concluded analogous Conventions with Ukraine (l. 3281/2004, art. 15), Armenia (l. 3007/2002, art. 6), China (l. 2358/1995, art. 9), Albania (l. 2311/1995, art. 13), Tunisia (l. 2228/1994, art. 17), Syria (l. 1450/1984, art. 5), Czech Republic (l. 1323/1983, art. 13), Poland (l. 1184/1981, art. 4), Hungary (l. 1149/1981, art. 13) and Bulgaria (l. 841/1978, art. 13).
- 38.
About justice in the field of private international law see Sp. Vrellis, Conflit ou coordination de valeurs en droit international privé – À la recherché de la justice, RCADI T. 308 (2007) pp. 175–485 and A. Bucher, La dimension sociale du droit international privé (2010).
- 39.
About this legislative text see A. Bonomi, The Hague Protocol of 23 November 2007 on the Law Applicable to Maintenance Obligations, YPIL 2008 pp. 333–357. S. also B. Ancel/H. Muir Watt, Aliments sans frontières. Le Règlement CE 4/2009 du 18 décembre 2008 relatif à la compétence, la loi applicable, la reconnaissance et l’exécution des décisions et la coopération en matière d’obligations alimentaires, Rev. crit. DIP 2010 pp. 457–484, A. Douga/V. Koumpli, Cross-border maintenance obligations in Europe: The EU Maintenance Regulation, in Essays in Honour of Spyridon Vrellis (2014) pp. 239–250 (in Greek).
- 40.
See article 22 of the Council Regulation EU 2016/1103 implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of matrimonial property regimes [regarding the initial Proposal for a Council Regulation on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of matrimonial regimes see M. Sotiropoulou, The option given to spouses to choose the applicable law defined in the Proposal for a Council Regulation on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of matrimonial property regimes: Progress or not?, RHDI 2013 pp. 21 et seq (where further bibliography)] and article 22 of the Council Regulation EU 2016/1104 implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of the property consequences of registered partnerships.
- 41.
For the relevant discussion see the site of the groupe européen de droit international privé http://www.gedip-egpil.eu/reunionstravail/gedip-reunions-23.htm#traitement. See also St. Bariayti/E. Pattaut, Codification et théorie générale du droit international privé, in: M. Fallon/P. Lagarde/S. Poillot-Peruzzetto (dir.), Quelle architecture pour un code européen de droit international privé? (2011) pp. 337–361 (342–347), E.-M. Kieniger, Ermittlung und Anwendung ausländischen Rechts, in: St. Leible/H. Unberath (Hrsg.), Brauchen wir eine Rom 0-Verordnung? (2013) pp. 479–501.
- 42.
See the CJEU’ judgment in case C-93/12 ET Agrokonsulting-04-Velko Stoyanov v. Izpalnitelen direktor na Darzhaven fond «Zemedelie» – Razplashtatelna agentsia of 27 June 2013.
- 43.
See Supreme Court 581/2010.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Tsouca, C. (2017). Greece: Foreign Law in the Greek Private International Law: Positive Solutions and Future Perspectives. In: Nishitani, Y. (eds) Treatment of Foreign Law - Dynamics towards Convergence?. Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law, vol 26. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56574-3_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56574-3_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-56572-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-56574-3
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)