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，梅首相表示：“我们希望我们的协议(关于英国和欧盟之间的未来关系)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，比如通过《卢加诺公约》，尽管我们希望达成一项反映我们独特出发点的更广泛的协议。”如果英国不是欧盟成员国，不接受CJEU的管辖权，这种涵盖比《卢加诺公约》涵盖的民事和商事问题更多的国际私法(PIL)领域的更广泛的协议是否可能甚至是可取的，将是AHRC PIL.PIL网络分析的核心问题之一，当案件提交给与外国有联系的法院时，PIL就会出现。PIL涉及三个问题：法院是否有管辖权，适用哪一项法律，以及外国判决是否可以得到承认和执行。英国PIL的一个主要部分是欧盟法律。欧盟民事司法合作背后的理由是“促进判决的自由流通，并[……]增强跨境案件的司法可及性”。《布鲁塞尔国际法院条例》创建的欧盟管辖权模式以及对判决的承认和执行往往为索赔人提供了管辖权的选择。《罗马第一和第二条例》确保同一套适用法律规则在欧盟内适用于合同义务和非合同义务案件。欧盟制定了关于家庭法的条例(布鲁塞尔国际家庭法和赡养法)。英国司法和法律专业在解决跨境纠纷方面拥有特殊专业知识的高素质使英格兰和威尔士成为世界领先的司法管辖区之一，吸引了高价值的索赔，并促进了诉讼当事人获得有效的法律补救。EUPILLAR项目由欧盟委员会资助，由几所欧盟大学实施，由现任PI领导，该项目考虑了欧盟PIL框架在英国退欧公投之前在欧盟的运作情况，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基于相互信任原则的布鲁塞尔Ia和IIa的判决而产生的。《海牙公约》为《海牙公约》规定了一个实质性的国际制度，对于外部目的，这些公约是欧盟《承认和执行公约》(法院选择、儿童绑架、儿童和赡养)的一部分，不久将通过一项新的《承认和执行公约》予以补充，有望成为该《公约》的一部分。此外，还有一项英联邦示范法制度，用于承认和执行民商事和赡养费方面的判决。最后，建立了欧洲自由贸易协定制度，以实现对民商事判决的管辖权和承认与执行(《卢加诺公约》)。因此，英国退欧后的PIL格局提供了在我们与其他欧盟成员国的关系中背离欧盟内部制度的机会，并利用重新焕发活力的外部能力为与其他国家的关系制定新的PIL战略。研究问题是：英国退欧会对英国的跨境诉讼模式产生怎样的影响？不同的公益诉讼制度会如何影响在英国提起诉讼的公益诉讼案件的数量？退欧后PIL的国际、英联邦、欧盟/EFTA和英国内部协调的适当组合是什么？欧盟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。新的数据集将澄清英国PIL的法律格局，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退欧后最佳PIL制度方面面临的挑战。英国政策制定者将在海牙会议上带头逐步统一全球PIL，并在英联邦发展司法合作方面发挥带头作用。

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.