Usluge informacijskog društva u EU: načelo države podrijetla, nadležnost i ugovorni statut

master's thesis

• Title (english): Information society services in the EU: country of origin principle, jurisdiction and contractual statute
• Author: Marija Vrajić
• Mentor: Tena Hoško (mentor)
• Committee member: Tena Hoško (predsjednik povjerenstva)
• Committee member: Davor Adrian Babić (član povjerenstva)
• Committee member: Dora Zgrabljić Rotar (član povjerenstva)
• Granter: University of Zagreb; Faculty of Law; (Private International Law); Zagreb
• Defense date and country: 2025-01-17, Croatia
• Scientific / art field, discipline and subdiscipline: SOCIAL SCIENCES; Law

Abstract

Direktivom 2000/31 su se prvi put harmonizirala materijalna pravila koja uređuju usluge informacijskog društva, zbog osiguranja slobode njihovog pružanja na unutarnjem tržištu EU-a. Predviđeni regulatorni mehanizmi za ostvarenje tog cilja su načelo zemlje podrijetla, zabrana prethodnog odobrenja i zahtjev u pogledu općih informacija. Načelo države podrijetla znači da država članica u kojoj pružatelj ima poslovni nastan nadzire pružanje usluga informacijskog društva, odnosno da takav pružatelj usluga podliježe zakonodavstvu te države članice. Do presude Suda EU-a u predmetu eDate ovo se načelo tumačilo kao kolizijsko pravilo. Da bi pružatelj bio obuhvaćen načelom države podrijetla, usluga se treba kvalificirati kao usluga informacijskog društva. Bez obzira na posebitosti takvih usluga, a koje su sveprisutnost i virtualnost, za određivanje nadležnosti i mjerodavnog prava za sporove iz trgovačkih ugovora sklopljenih putem interneta, nisu predviđena posebna pravila već se primjenjuju opća pravila Uredbe Bruxelles I bis i Uredbe Rim I. Tako se dvojbe o vrsti ugovora kod online izvršenja razrješuju, za ugovore o kupoprodaji, analogno presudi Suda EU-a u predmetu UsedSoft; a za ugovore o uslugama, u skladu s objašnjenjima iz presude Falco. Kod određivanja posebne nadležnosti, upitna je primjena posebnih poveznica koje se oslanjaju na geografsku lokaciju mjesta izvršenja obveza koje se izvršavaju online. O takvim slučajevima još nije odlučivao Sud EU-a. Na internetske slučajeve iz ugovora moći će se, za određivanje nadležnosti i mjerodavnog prava, primijeniti ostale tradicionalne poveznice. Kod određivanja mjerodavnog prava, u nedostatku sporazuma o izboru prava, generalno gledano, doći će do podudarnosti između mjerodavnog prava i prava u skladu s kojim se pruža usluga informacijskog društva.

Abstract (english)

Directive 2000/31 first harmonized the substantive law governing information society services in order to ensure the free provision of these services within the EU internal market. The regulatory mechanisms envisaged to achieve this goal are the country of origin principle, the prohibition of prior authorisation, and the requirement regarding general information. The country of origin principle means that the Member State in which the provider is established supervises the provision of information society services, therefore the service provider is subject to the legislation of that Member State. Prior to the ruling of the Court of Justice of the EU in the eDate case, this principle was interpreted as a conflict of laws rule. For a service provider to be covered by the country of origin principle, the service must qualify as an information society service. Regardless of the specific characteristics of such services, such as their ubiquity and virtuality, there are no special rules for determining jurisdiction and applicable law for disputes arising from commercial contracts concluded over the internet. Instead, the general rules of Bruxelles I bis Regulation and Rome I Regulation apply. Thus, uncertainties about the type of contract in the case of online contract performance are resolved analogous to the Court of Justice of the EU’s judgment in the UsedSoft case, for sales contracts, and for service contracts in accordance with the rationale from the Falco judgment. When determining special jurisdiction, it is questionable whether special connecting factors based on the geographical location can be applied regarding the location where obligations are executed online. The Court of Justice of the EU has not yet ruled on such cases. In cases of online contracts, other traditional connecting factors will be applied to determine jurisdiction and applicable law. When determining the applicable law, in the absence of an agreement on the choice of law, generally the applicable law and the law determined based on the country of origin principle coincide.

• Keywords: Direktiva 2000/31; usluge informacijskog društva; načelo države podrijetla; Uredba Bruxelles I bis; nadležnost za sporove iz ugovora; Uredba Rim I; ugovorni statut
• Keywords (english): Directive 2000/31; information society services; country of origin principle; Brussels I bis Regulation; jurisdiction for disputes arising from contracts; Rome I Regulation; contractual statute
• Language: croatian
• URN:NBN: urn:nbn:hr:199:490466
• Study programme: Title: Law; Study programme type: university; Study level: integrated undergraduate and graduate; Academic / professional title: sveučilišni magistar/magistrica prava (sveučilišni magistar/magistrica prava)
• Type of resource: Text
• File origin: Born digital
• Access conditions: Open access
• Created on: 2025-01-22 07:46:32