Conference on Sustainable Global Value Chains and Private International Law – Conflict of Laws

On 17 October 2025, the EBS Regulation College in Oestrich-Winkel, Germany, hosted a convention Sustainable World Worth Chains and Personal Worldwide Regulation. The convention was organised by Professors Veronica Ruiz Abou-Nigm (Edinburgh Regulation College) and Michael Nietsch (EBS Regulation College) as a part of the Regulation Faculties World League Sustainable World Worth Chains Venture (see additionally right here).

The convention introduced collectively a variety of students specialised in personal worldwide regulation, firm regulation, and contract regulation to debate the function of personal regulation and personal worldwide regulation in social, financial, and environmental sustainability inside world worth chains.

Keynote

Ralf Michaels (Max Planck Institute for Comparative and Worldwide Personal Regulation, Hamburg, Germany) delivered the keynote lecture entitled “European Regulation for World Worth Chains – Human Rights Development or European Imperialism?” Professor Michaels addressed this query from a historic perspective. He associated the historic roots of current sourcing practices to modern provide chains, drawing on a wealth of theoretical insights. He additional mirrored on the conceptualisations that stay vital for the authorized self-discipline to contribute to addressing financial inequalities in modern world sourcing practices facilitated by interconnected chains of contracts.

After the keynote, a number of students offered insights into their present analysis, which resonated with varied points of the keynote lecture.

Different contributions

Ren Yatsunami (Kyushu College, Japan) addressed the ‘Governance Gaps on World Worth Chains from the Perspective of Personal Worldwide Regulation’. Professor Yatsunami sketched, inter alia, a scenario during which an act happening in Japan triggered the appliance of French regulation on the obligation of vigilance. He mentioned this case from the attitude of Japanese courts and Japanese personal worldwide regulation, together with the query of overriding obligatory guidelines, as an instance the intricacies of making use of the units of guidelines concerned.

Carlos Vázquez (Georgetown College, Washington D.C., United States) elaborated on the ‘Alternative of Regulation in Transnational Enterprise and Human Rights Litigation’. Professor Vázquez mentioned the conflict-of-law approaches in each america and the European Union, distinguishing between two methods of framing litigation — as a breach of worldwide regulation and as a breach of nationwide regulation, primarily tort regulation — and examined the peculiarities of every. Counting on historic and theoretical insights into each methods of framing litigation, the contribution provided a mirrored image on potential methods ahead.

The dialogue then turned to contract regulation, specifically the 1980 United Nations Conference on Contracts for the Worldwide Sale of Items (CISG). Felix M. Wilke (EBS Regulation College, Oestrich-Winkel, Germany) titled his contribution ‘’Tainted by Hurt however Match for Sale? Human Rights and the Idea of Non-Conformity below the CISG’. Professor Wilke targeted on the connection between provide chain regulation and the CISG’s provisions on the standard and conformity of products and cures.

Thereafter, Sara Sánchez (IE College, Madrid, Spain) linked the contract regulation framework with procedural regulation and EU regulation. In her contribution ‘Entry To Justice in CS3D-Associated Claims’, Professor Sánchez mentioned the absence of jurisdictional guidelines within the regulation of due diligence in provide chains (see additionally posts by Michaels & Sommerfeld right here and by Silva de Freitas & Kramer right here). Professor Sánchez proposed an EU law-based answer to handle this hole.

Irene-Marie Esser (College of Glasgow, Scotland UK) and Christopher Riley (College of Durham) then turned to ‘The Interaction between Reporting Necessities and Group Legal responsibility for Provide Chain Misconduct – Transnational Enterprise Firms’. They addressed the prevailing case regulation, normative issues, and avenues for the additional growth of firm regulation points of legal responsibility associated to acts and omissions involving teams of firms in provide chains.

Simone Lamont-Black (College of Edinburgh, Scotland, UK) and Catherine Pédamon (College of Westminster, UK) took a broad take a look at the agricultural enterprise and meals provides. Departing from the premise that contractual clauses are usually not ample to offer meals safety and sustainability in world meals provide chains, these students elaborated on different potential options.

The final panel drew conclusions and mentioned rising themes for additional analysis. The discussants have been Nevena Jevremovic (College of Aberdeen, UK), Matthias Goldmann (EBS Regulation College), Klaas Hendrik Eller (College of Amsterdam, the Netherlands), and Ekaterina Pannebakker (Leiden College, the Netherlands).