Standing surety in Europe

common core or Tower of Babel?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This article analyses the treatment of non‐professional suretyship agreements across the EU in the context provided by Commission initiatives aimed firstly at creating a single market in financial services and secondly at improving the coherence of European private law. Predictably, given their polycontextual function, we are confronted with starkly divergent national approaches towards such agreements: a ‘Tower of Babel’ rather than a ‘common core’. The article proceeds to consider how we may see elements of commonality arising through the tension between the differing national approaches – seen in terms of a Unitary Network. In the course of this analysis the treble paradox of surety protection is described. The article finishes with a prediction of the relevance of a dual‐track strategy in this field: involving measures of sector‐specific, vertical harmonisation, and a programme of common‐law style, non‐legislative harmonisation through judicial convergence.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)175-196
Number of pages22
JournalModern Law Review
Volume70
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 23 Feb 2007

Fingerprint

harmonization
private law
European Law
financial service
EU
market
coherence

Keywords

  • European private law
  • suretyship agreements
  • polycontextual law

Cite this

@article{ff015e3754894ba5af698b0f2dc09e2e,
title = "Standing surety in Europe: common core or Tower of Babel?",
abstract = "This article analyses the treatment of non‐professional suretyship agreements across the EU in the context provided by Commission initiatives aimed firstly at creating a single market in financial services and secondly at improving the coherence of European private law. Predictably, given their polycontextual function, we are confronted with starkly divergent national approaches towards such agreements: a ‘Tower of Babel’ rather than a ‘common core’. The article proceeds to consider how we may see elements of commonality arising through the tension between the differing national approaches – seen in terms of a Unitary Network. In the course of this analysis the treble paradox of surety protection is described. The article finishes with a prediction of the relevance of a dual‐track strategy in this field: involving measures of sector‐specific, vertical harmonisation, and a programme of common‐law style, non‐legislative harmonisation through judicial convergence.",
keywords = "European private law, suretyship agreements, polycontextual law",
author = "Mel Kenny",
year = "2007",
month = "2",
day = "23",
doi = "10.1111/j.1468-2230.2007.00633.x",
language = "English",
volume = "70",
pages = "175--196",
journal = "Modern Law Review",
issn = "0026-7961",
number = "2",

}

Standing surety in Europe : common core or Tower of Babel? / Kenny, Mel.

In: Modern Law Review, Vol. 70, No. 2, 23.02.2007, p. 175-196.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Standing surety in Europe

T2 - common core or Tower of Babel?

AU - Kenny, Mel

PY - 2007/2/23

Y1 - 2007/2/23

N2 - This article analyses the treatment of non‐professional suretyship agreements across the EU in the context provided by Commission initiatives aimed firstly at creating a single market in financial services and secondly at improving the coherence of European private law. Predictably, given their polycontextual function, we are confronted with starkly divergent national approaches towards such agreements: a ‘Tower of Babel’ rather than a ‘common core’. The article proceeds to consider how we may see elements of commonality arising through the tension between the differing national approaches – seen in terms of a Unitary Network. In the course of this analysis the treble paradox of surety protection is described. The article finishes with a prediction of the relevance of a dual‐track strategy in this field: involving measures of sector‐specific, vertical harmonisation, and a programme of common‐law style, non‐legislative harmonisation through judicial convergence.

AB - This article analyses the treatment of non‐professional suretyship agreements across the EU in the context provided by Commission initiatives aimed firstly at creating a single market in financial services and secondly at improving the coherence of European private law. Predictably, given their polycontextual function, we are confronted with starkly divergent national approaches towards such agreements: a ‘Tower of Babel’ rather than a ‘common core’. The article proceeds to consider how we may see elements of commonality arising through the tension between the differing national approaches – seen in terms of a Unitary Network. In the course of this analysis the treble paradox of surety protection is described. The article finishes with a prediction of the relevance of a dual‐track strategy in this field: involving measures of sector‐specific, vertical harmonisation, and a programme of common‐law style, non‐legislative harmonisation through judicial convergence.

KW - European private law

KW - suretyship agreements

KW - polycontextual law

UR - https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/14682230

U2 - 10.1111/j.1468-2230.2007.00633.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1468-2230.2007.00633.x

M3 - Article

VL - 70

SP - 175

EP - 196

JO - Modern Law Review

JF - Modern Law Review

SN - 0026-7961

IS - 2

ER -