Where do we go from here? The development of private international law in the UK and the post Brexit environment.

2018年3月2日，英国首相梅表示：“我们希望我们（关于英国和欧盟未来关系的）协议涵盖民事司法合作，欧盟已经表明它可以与非成员国达成协议，例如通过《卢加诺公约》，尽管我们希望达成一项更广泛的协议，反映我们独特的起点。“这样一个涵盖更多国际私法领域的更广泛的协议，如果英国不是欧盟成员国，不接受欧盟法院的管辖权，则《卢加诺公约》所涵盖的民事和商业问题是可能的，甚至是可取的，这将是澳大利亚人权委员会网络分析的中心问题之一。连接.国际私法涉及三个问题：法院是否有管辖权，适用哪种法律，以及外国判决是否得到承认和执行。英国PIL的主要部分是欧盟法律。欧盟民事司法合作背后的基本原理是“促进判决的自由流通，并[...]在跨境案件中加强司法救助。布鲁塞尔Ia条例所建立的欧盟管辖权以及承认和执行判决的模式通常为索赔人提供管辖权的选择。《罗马I和II条例》确保在欧盟范围内，合同和非合同义务案件适用同一套适用法律规则。欧盟制定了家庭法条例（布鲁塞尔IIa和抚养）。英国司法机构和法律的专业人员在解决跨境纠纷方面具有特殊的专业知识，这使得英格兰和威尔士成为世界上领先的司法管辖区之一，吸引了高价值的索赔，并促进诉讼当事人获得有效的法律的补救措施。由欧盟委员会资助，由几所欧盟大学进行并由现任PI领导的EUPILLAR项目，考虑了欧盟PIL框架在英国脱欧投票前如何在欧盟运作，暴露了欧盟PIL的问题。欧盟框架的一个主要弱点是，国家司法系统运作中的一些缺陷是通过承认和执行布鲁塞尔Ia和IIa基于互信原则的判决而输出的。《海牙公约》提供了一个实质性的国际保护法律制度，就外部而言，这些公约是欧盟法律（法院选择、儿童诱拐、儿童和抚养）的一部分，不久将通过一项新的《承认和执行公约》加以补充，该公约有望成为欧盟法律的一部分。此外，还有一个关于承认和执行民事和商业事项以及赡养方面判决的英联邦示范法制度。最后，欧洲自由贸易区有一个关于民事和商事案件的管辖权以及判决的承认和执行的制度（《卢加诺公约》）。因此，英国脱欧后的国际保护环境为我们与其他欧盟成员国的关系提供了脱离欧盟内部制度的机会，并利用重振的外部能力为与其他国家的关系制定新的国际保护战略。研究问题是：英国脱欧如何影响英国的跨境诉讼模式？不同的PIL制度如何影响在英国提起诉讼的PIL案件数量？英国退欧后，国际、英联邦、欧盟/欧洲自由贸易联盟和英国内部协调PIL的适当组合是什么？欧盟成立前的数据和最近的数据都是作为试点研究的一部分收集的，将进行比较。新的数据集将阐明英国的PIL法律的格局，并开始深入了解诉讼当事人在跨境案件中的当前策略。这将有助于确定英国政策制定者在创建最佳后Brexit PIL制度方面面临的挑战。联合王国决策者将在海牙会议上带头逐步统一全球国际私法，并在英联邦发展司法合作。

On 2 March 2018 Prime Minister May said: "We will want our agreement [on the future relationship between the UK and the EU] to cover civil judicial cooperation, where the EU has already shown that it can reach agreement with non-member states, such as through the Lugano Convention, although we would want a broader agreement that reflects our unique starting point." Whether such a broader agreement that would encompass more areas of private international law (PIL) than the civil and commercial issues covered by the Lugano Convention is possible or even desirable if the UK is not a Member State of the EU and does not accept the jurisdiction of the CJEU will be one of the central issues analysed by the AHRC Network on PIL.PIL arises when a case comes before a court with a foreign connection. PIL is concerned with three issues; does the court have jurisdiction, which law applies and can a foreign judgment be recognised and enforced. A major part of UK PIL is EU law. The rationale behind EU civil judicial co-operation is to "facilitate the free circulation of judgments and to [...] enhance access to justice" in cross-border cases. The EU model for jurisdiction and recognition and enforcement of judgments created by the Brussels Ia Regulation often provides claimants with a choice of jurisdiction. The Rome I&II Regulations ensure that the same set of applicable law rules apply within the EU in contractual and non-contractual obligation cases. The EU has developed Regulations on family law (Brussels IIa and Maintenance). The high quality of the UK judiciary and legal professions with a particular expertise in resolving cross-border disputes makes England and Wales one of the leading jurisdictions in the world, attracting high value claims and facilitating litigants' access to effective legal remedies. The EUPILLAR project, funded by the EU Commission, conducted by several EU Universities and led by the current PI, considered how the EU PIL framework was functioning in the EU before the Brexit vote, exposing the problems with EU PIL. A major weakness of the EU framework is that some deficiencies in the functioning of national judicial systems are exported through recognition and enforcement of judgments under Brussels Ia and IIa based on the principle of mutual trust. A substantial international regime in PIL is provided by Hague Conventions which for external purposes are part of the EU acquis (Choice of Court, Child Abduction, Children and Maintenance) shortly to be added to by a new Recognition and Enforcement Convention which will hopefully become part of that acquis. Furthermore there is a Commonwealth model law regime for recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters and in maintenance. Finally, there is an EFTA regime for jurisdiction and recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (Lugano Convention). The post-Brexit PIL landscape therefore presents opportunities to diverge from the EU internal regime in our relationship with other EU Member States and to utilise a reinvigorated external competence to develop a new PIL strategy for relations with other States. The research questions are: How could Brexit impact on the cross-border litigation pattern in the UK? How might different PIL regimes affect the number of PIL cases litigated in the UK? What is the appropriate mix of international, Commonwealth, EU/EFTA and intra-UK harmonisation of PIL post Brexit? Pre-EU data and recent data, both gathered as part of a pilot study, will be compared. The new datasets will clarify the PIL legal landscape in the UK and begin to gain insights into litigants' current strategies in cross-border cases. This will help to identify the challenges faced by UK policy-makers to create the best post-Brexit PIL regime. UK policy makers will take a lead in progressively unifying global PIL at the Hague Conference and in the development of judicial cooperation in the Commonwealth.