Procedural Autonomy: Room for Manoeuvre?

The principle of procedural autonomy plays an important role in the relation between EU law and national private law. Member States are free to set up the procedural system as they deem fit. On the other hand, Member States are confronted with a growing body of EU legislation and EU case on procedural topics, including but not limited to the requirement of equal and efficient protection EU law. This seminar aims to explore the procedural autonomy of the member states in civil cases.

The topic is current. ‘Europe is in a period of increasing Europeanisation of civil procedure.’ That is the first sentence of the book The European Union and National Civil Procedure. The process of Europeanisation of national civil procedure has not come not an end. On the contrary: the influence of Europe on national civil procedure of the Member States is ongoing. What does this mean for the autonomy of the Member States to construct their procedural system as they deem fit? Does procedural autonomy still adequately describe the power of the national law-makers, or is the room to manoeuvre limited in such a way that procedural autonomy is misleading?

This central theme may challenge the participants to rethink a central concept and perhaps even question its existence. Is there a difference in perspective on procedural autonomy between the Member States? Or is there otherwise a variety concerning this procedural autonomy?

We are aiming for the results to be published in a book. As follows from the topic, the book will explore the impact of European law on national civil procedure using case-studies for several countries. In the proposed book, the participating colleagues will discuss how the civil procedure system of their country has reacted to EU law. They will disseminate the reasons for why these changes are the most significant and the further implications of EU law on the civil procedure.

The articles will discuss the impact of EU law on national procedural law and the room for manoeuvre in national procedural law. That might concern, for example, ex officio application, limitation periods, evidence, costs of proceedings etc. Other topics in the field of civil procedure law where procedural autonomy may be at stake, can be addressed as well, probably varying by Member State. It may concern consumer law, or other fields of law. Which doctrines, which pieces of legislation or features in legislation pose problems for national civil procedure? Are some legal systems or topics more prone to integrate European rules, and are others more resistant to changes? Is procedural autonomy more limited in some countries than others? Are there differences in how procedural autonomy is understood and conceptualised nationally?

Funded by Leiden University

Head: Professor Dr. Bart Krans, Leiden Univeristy & professor Dr. Anna Nylund, University of Tromsø