Asymmetric jurisdiction clauses under the Brussels-Lugano and Hague regimes

Asymmetric jurisdiction clauses are choice of court agreements which bind one party to bring proceedings exclusively before the designated court and give the other party a right to choose, in addition to that court, other competent courts. The most common type of asymmetric clauses are the so-called Rothschild clauses. The article considers the enforceability requirements which asymmetric clauses must satisfy in order to be covered by the Brussels-Lugano regime, their effects under Regulation 1215/2012 and the Lugano Convention of 2007 and the issue of whether asymmetric clauses are covered by Art. 31(2) of Regulation 1215/2012, as well as the applicability of the Hague regime. To this end, reference is made to the relevant jurisprudence of the ECJ and national courts, with particular reference to the recent Lastre judgment in which the ECJ imposed for the first time limits on the validity of asymmetric clauses, while leaving open some important questions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
CUADERNOS DE DERECHO TRANSNACIONAL
Published
2025-10-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.20318/cdt.2025.9915
Primary Topic
Conflict of Laws and Jurisdiction
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Asymmetric jurisdiction clauses under the Brussels-Lugano and Hague regimes

Rebekka Monico
CUADERNOS DE DERECHO TRANSNACIONAL
Conflict of Laws and Jurisdiction
article

Asymmetric jurisdiction clauses under the Brussels-Lugano and Hague regimes

Rebekka Monico
article en

Abstract

Asymmetric jurisdiction clauses are choice of court agreements which bind one party to bring proceedings exclusively before the designated court and give the other party a right to choose, in addition to that court, other competent courts. The most common type of asymmetric clauses are the so-called Rothschild clauses. The article considers the enforceability requirements which asymmetric clauses must satisfy in order to be covered by the Brussels-Lugano regime, their effects under Regulation 1215/2012 and the Lugano Convention of 2007 and the issue of whether asymmetric clauses are covered by Art. 31(2) of Regulation 1215/2012, as well as the applicability of the Hague regime. To this end, reference is made to the relevant jurisprudence of the ECJ and national courts, with particular reference to the recent Lastre judgment in which the ECJ imposed for the first time limits on the validity of asymmetric clauses, while leaving open some important questions.

CUADERNOS DE DERECHO TRANSNACIONALVol. 17(2)
University of Insubria (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 64%
Conflict of Laws and Jurisdiction
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.