XALQARO TIJORAT VAKILLIGI SHARTNOMALARI UCHUN HUQUQNI TANLASH: TARAFLARNING ERK MUXTORIYATI VA TIJORIY VAKIL HIMOYASI OʻRTASIDAGI MUVOZANAT
Kalit so'zlar
https://doi.org/10.47390/SPR1342V6SI3Y2026N30Kalit so'zlar
huquqni tanlash, xalqaro tijorat vakilligi, 86/653/EEC Direktiva, taraflarning erk muxtoriyati, ustuvor majburiy normalar, tijoriy vakil himoyasi, xalqaro xususiy huquq.Annotasiya
Taraflar avtonomiyasi tamoyili xalqaro shartnoma huquqining fundamental ustuni boʻlib qolmoqda va tijorat ishtirokchilariga oʻz munosabatlarini tartibga soluvchi huquqiy rejimni belgilash imkonini beradi. Biroq, xalqaro tijorat vakilligi shartnomalari doirasida bu erkinlik koʻpincha iqtisodiy jihatdan zaif tomon sifatida qaraladigan tijorat agentini himoya qilish uchun ishlab chiqilgan majburiy qonunchilik rejimlari bilan toʻqnash keladi. Ushbu maqola shartnoma erkinligi va Yevropa Ittifoqi tomonidan 86/653/EEC Direktiva orqali oʻrnatilgan majburiy himoya qoidalari oʻrtasidagi ziddiyatni oʻrganadi. Ustuvor majburiy normalarning doktrinal asoslari va Yevropa Ittifoqi Sudining tegishli sud amaliyotini oʻrganish orqali, ushbu tadqiqot sudlar prinsipialning Yevropa Ittifoqiga kirmagan davlat huquqini tanlashi va agentning shartnoma bekor qilinganda qonuniy tovon yoki kompensatsiya olish huquqi oʻrtasidagi ziddiyatni qanday hal qilishini tahlil qiladi. Maqola transchegaraviy agentlik shartnomalarida taraflar avtonomiyasi chegaralarini oydinlashtirish va globallashgan bozorda himoya bazasini saqlashda Direktiva samaradorligini baholashga qaratilgan.
Manbalar
1. Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I), OJ L 177, 4.7.2008.
2. Council Directive 86/653/EEC of 18 December 1986 on the coordination of the laws of the Member States relating to self-employed commercial agents, OJ L 382, 31.12.1986.
3. Council Directive 86/653/EEC of 18 December 1986 on the coordination of the laws of the Member States relating to self-employed commercial agents, Article 17.
4. Dicey, A. V., Morris, J. H. C., & Collins, L. (2012). Dicey, Morris and Collins on the Conflict of Laws (15th ed.). Sweet & Maxwell.
5. Verhagen, H. L. E. (2002). The Tension Between Party Autonomy and European Union Law: Some Observations on Ingmar GB Ltd v Eaton Leonard Technologies Inc. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 51(1), 135-154.
6. Michaels, R. (2001). The New European Choice-of-Law Revolution. Tulane Law Review, 75, 1607-1644.
7. Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I), Article 9(1).
8. Council Directive 86/653/EEC of 18 December 1986 on the coordination of the laws of the Member States relating to self-employed commercial agents, Article 17.
9. Council Directive 86/653/EEC of 18 December 1986 on the coordination of the laws of the Member States relating to self-employed commercial agents, Article 19.
10. Court of Justice of the European Union, Case C-381/98, Ingmar GB Ltd v Eaton Leonard Technologies Inc, [2000] ECR I-9305.
11. Court of Justice of the European Union, Case C-381/98, Ingmar GB Ltd v Eaton Leonard Technologies Inc, [2000] ECR I-9305, paragraphs 24-25.
12. Court of Justice of the European Union, Case C-184/12, United Antwerp Maritime Agencies (Unamar) NV v Navigation Maritime Bulgare, [2013] ECLI:EU:C:2013:663.
13. Court of Justice of the European Union, Case C-184/12, United Antwerp Maritime Agencies (Unamar) NV v Navigation Maritime Bulgare, [2013] ECLI:EU:C:2013:663, paragraph 50.
14. Plender, R., & Wilderspin, M. (2009). The European Private International Law of Obligations (3rd ed.). Sweet & Maxwell.
15. Rühl, G. (2014). The Protection of Weaker Parties in the Private International Law of the European Union. Journal of Private International Law, 10(3), 335-358.
