Effective Private Law Harmonisation: A Comparative Analysis of the EU Draft Regulation on Common European Sales Law and the OHADA Uniform Acts
| Jurisdiction | South Africa |
| Published date | 16 August 2019 |
| Citation | (2014) 1(1) Journal of Comparative Law in Africa 47 |
| Pages | 47-65 |
| Date | 16 August 2019 |
| Author | Richard Rachlitz |
EFFECTIVE PRIVATE LAW HARMONISATION:
A COMPARATIVEANALYSIS OF THE EU DRAFT
REGULATION ON COMMON EUROPEAN SALES
LAW AND THE OHADA UNIFORM ACTS
RICHARD RACHLITZ*
Chair of Civil Law, Commercial and Company Law,Legal Theory, Akademischer
Rat auf Zeit, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Germany
When considering legal harmonisation and unification, scholars tend to examine the relating
issues from an almost exclusively content-related point of view. Issues regarding the context
of the factual application of the new law are often given less attention, or simply ignored.
This paper aims to address the topic of legal harmonisation and unification from a different
perspective. It focuses on the functional prerequisites of effective private law harmonisation
and unification. By comparing the respective contexts of the application of the EU Draft
Regulation on Common European Sales Law and the OHADA Uniform Acts, three
prerequisites of both harmonisation and unification are identified, namely (an adequate
degree of) linguistic, judicial and discursive alignment throughout the states involved. It is
argued that these functional prerequisites are of no less importance than the immediate
content of the harmonised or unified law, as the law does not function in isolation from,but
dependent on and in response to, prerequisitesset in the real world.
[Lorsqu’on considère l’harmonisation et l’unification juridique, les chercheurs ont la
tendance à examiner les questions relatives à partir d’un point de vue presque
exclusivement liés au contenu. Les questions relatives au contexte de l’application factuelle
de la nouvelle loi ont trop souvent peu d’attention, ou sont tout simplement ignorés
complètement. Cet article vise à aborder la question de l’harmonisation et de l’unification
juridique dans une perspective différente. Il se concentre sur les préalables fonctionnels
d’une harmonisation ou unification efficace du droit privé. En comparant le contexte
respectif de l’application du projet de règlement de l’UE sur le droit commun européen de
la vente et les Actes uniformes OHADA, trois conditions préalables de l’harmonisation et
de l’unification sont identifiés , à savoir (un degré adéquate de) alignement linguistique,
judiciaire et discursive dans tous les Etats impliqués . Il fait valoir que ces préalables
fonctionnels ne sont pas moins d’importance que le contenu immédiate de la loi
harmonisée ou unifiée, que la loi ne fonctionne pas isolée de, mais dépendant de et en
réponse à, des conditions préalables énoncées dans le monde réel.]
Keywords: private law, harmonisation, unification, Draft Regulation
on Common European Sales Law, Organisation for the
Harmonisation of Business Law in Africa (OHADA)
Abbreviations: CCJA Common Court of Justice and Arbitration (of
OHADA)
CESL Common European Sales Law
CJEU Court of Justice of the European Union
* Ass Jur, LLM (Stellenbosch). This article is based on a paper presented in
October 2012 at Stellenbosch University. I would like to thank Prof J du Plessis for
his support to conduct this research.
47
(2014) 1(1) Journal of Comparative Law in Africa 47
© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd
ERSUMA Regional Training Center for Legal Officers
OHADA Organisation for the Harmonisation of Business
Law in Africa
OHADA and its Uniform Acts
The OHADA Treaty of 17 October 1993 signaled the beginning of the
Organisation for the Harmonisation of Business Law in Africa (Organisation
pour l’Harmonisation en Afrique du Droit des Affaires, hereinafter ‘OHADA’).
1
It
was formed to harmonise commercial law in francophone Africa ‘by the
elaboration and adoption of simple modern common rules adapted to their
economies, by setting up appropriate judicial procedures, and by encourag-
ing arbitration for the settlement of contractual disputes’.
2
OHADA is concerned exclusively with business law on an enterprise
level. Business law on the market level (competition, banking and so on) is
dealt with by other organisations and state unions, such as the West African
Economic and Monetary Union (Union Economique Monétaire Ouest Africaine,
UEMOA), the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)
and the Central African Economic and Monetary Community (Communauté
Economique et Monétaire de l’Afrique Centrale, CEMAC).
3
The OHADA states
— namely Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Central African Republic,
Chad, the Comoros, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon,
Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Mali, Niger, Senegal and Togo — aim to achieve
‘harmonisation of business laws’ (l’harmonisation du droit des affaires), as set
out in Article 1 of the OHADA Treaty, by enacting Uniform Acts (Actes
Uniformes). As Uniform Acts create identical law in each member state, it is
more precise to refer to the process induced by OHADA not as harmonisa-
tion but as unification.
4
Thus far, nine Uniform Acts are in force, regarding,
inter alia, general commercial law, commercial companies, securities law and
collective proceedings for wiping off debts, accounting and the transport of
goods on roads.
5
Uniform Acts are directly applicable in each member state.
6
They are self-contained and repeal any inconsistent lex anterior and lex
1
The OHADATreaty is available from:
2
OHADATreaty, art 1.
3
Beauchard, Renaud & Kodo, Mahutodji Jimmy Vital (2011) Can OHADA
Increase Legal Certainty in Africa? (Justice and Development Working Paper Series
No 17, World Bank) 13. Available from:
EXTLAWJUSTINST/Resources/17-2011CanOHADAIncrease.pdf?
resourceurlname=17-2011CanOHADAIncrease.pdf>.
4
Beauchard & Kodo 8–9; Gout, Olivier (2012) ‘L’harmonisation du droit des
affaires en Afrique: le droit OHADA’ in Quezel-Ambrunaz, Christophe (ed) Les défis
de l’harmonisation européenne du droitdes contrats 17, 19–20.
5
See
6
OHADATreaty, art 10.
(2014) 1 JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE LAW IN AFRICA48
© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd
posterior of any member state.
7
OHADA’s working languages are French,
English, Spanish and Portuguese, but de facto OHADA operates almost
exclusively in French.
8
All Uniform Acts are, or will be, made available in
these four languages, but in case of ambiguity, the French version always
prevails.
9
Institutionally, the unification process is backed by the Common Court of
Justice and Arbitration (Cour Commune de Justice et d’Arbitrage, hereinafter
‘CCJA’) and the Regional Training Center for Legal Officers (Ecole Régionale
Supérieure de la Magistrature, hereinafter ‘ERSUMA’). The CCJA is, inter alia,
responsible for the uniform interpretation and application of the Uniform
Acts. In case of a dispute related to a Uniform Act, the CCJA performs, on
appeal by the defeated party, a de novo review of any decision of the national
courts of second instance. The CCJA replaces the Supreme Courts of the
member states; its judgments are final and directly enforceable in every
member state.
10
The proceedings before the CCJA are in French.
11
ERSUMA
12
aims to ensure standardised and sufficient legal training
of judges and other legal professionals in the member states with respect
to OHADA Uniform Acts, in order to foster a uniform approach to the
OHADA Uniform Acts and the law in general.
13
The EU and its Draft Regulation on a Common European Sales
Law
The European Union (EU) took its current shape in 2009 under the Lisbon
Treaty and currently has 28 member states. European integration goes far
beyond the aims of OHADA in that it is not restricted solely to the
7
Bolmin, Monique, Bouillet-Cordonnier, Ghislaine & Medjad, Karin (1994)
‘Harmonisation du troit des affaires dans la Zone Franc’ 121(2) Journal du droit
international 375 at 387.
8
For the relevance of local languages, cf Allott,Anthony (1968) ‘The Unification
of Laws in Africa’16 The American Journal of Comparative Law 51 at 83–84.
9
OHADATreaty, art 42(2).
10
OHADA Treaty, arts 14(3)–(5) and 20. Cf Beauchard & Kodo 19. See also
Martor, Boris et al (2007) Business Law in Africa: OHADA and the Harmonization
Process 3 at 10–11. In addition, any national court may consult the CCJAand ask for a
binding interpretation of any relevant provision of a Uniform Act (OHADATreaty,
arts 13 and 14(2)). For an overview of the role of the CCJA, see Douajni, Gaston
Kenfack (2009) ‘L’expérience internationale de la Cour commune de justice et
d’arbitrage (CCJA) de l’Organisation pour l’harmonisation en Afrique du droit des
affaires (OHADA)’ 119(868) Penant: revue de droit des pays d’Afrique 356; Diallo,
Bakary (2007) ‘Réflexions sur le pouvoir d’évocation de la Cour Commune de
Justice et d’Arbitrage dans le cadre du traité de l’OHADA’117(858) Penant: revue de
droit des pays d’Afrique 40.
11
Martor et al 12.
12
Established under OHADATreaty, art 41.
13
Mouloul, Alhousseini (2009) Understanding the Organizationfor the Harmonization
of Business Laws in Africa (O.H.A.D.A.) 46–7, 50 (French version: (2008) Comprendre
L’Organisation pour L’Harmonisation en Afrique du Droit des Affaires); Martor et al 3 at
13.
EFFECTIVE PRIVATE LAW HARMONISATION 49
© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd
unification of business law. Instead, the EU is designed to cover a broad
variety of aspects, such as the creation of a single market ensuring free
movement of goods, services, capital and people, and common policies on
justice and home affairs, agriculture, development and so on. Private law
harmonisation is only one of many tasks of the EU, albeit an important one.
Contrary to OHADA, the EU has chosen to take the path of harmonisa-
tion. Harmonisation does not seek to substitute different legal systems with
one single set of rules, but merely to create common standards and a certain
degree of consistency. Currently, European private law harmonisation deals
almost exclusively with consumer protection. Harmonisation in this field has
been achieved mainly by means of directives, which are binding, as to the
result to be achieved, upon the member states, but allow the national
authorities of each member state to choose the form and method by which
the results are to be achieved.
14
However, to reduce fragmentation and incoherence in the field of private
law in Europe
15
to the advantage of cross-border trade,
16
the EU Commis-
sion decided both to broaden the focus and to change the means of
harmonisation. In 2011, it published the Proposal for a Regulation of the
European Parliament and of the Council on a Common European Sales
Law,
17
which is discussed in the EU law-making process as of this writing.
The proposed Common European Sales Law (droit commun européen de la
14
Article 288(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
(Consolidated Version) (2010) Official Journal of the European Union (C 83/47, 30
March), available from:
uri=OJ:C:2010:083:0047:0200:en:PDF>. A notable exception in the field of busi-
ness law is Council Regulation (EC) No 2157/2001 of 8 October, which established
the Societas Europaea.
15
Cf the valuation of Zimmermann, Reinhard (2012) ‘Codification — The
Civilian Experience Reconsidered on the Eve of a Common European Sales Law’
8(4) European Review of Contract Law 367 at 386. Available from:
com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2166765>
16
Explanatory Memorandum to the Proposal for a Regulation of the European
Parliament and of the Council on a Common European Sales Law (COM (2011) 635
final), first paragraph. Available from: -lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/
LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2011:0635:FIN:en:PDF>
17
Available from: .do?uri=
COM:2011:0635:FIN:en:PDF>. The proposal is largely based on the work of two
academic experts groups, namely the Study Group on a European Civil Code and the
European Research Group on Existing EC Private Law (Acquis Group), cf Green
Paper from the Commission on Policy Options for Progress towards a European
Contract Law for Consumers and Businesses (COM (2010) 348 final), available from:
COM:2010:0348:FIN:en:PDF>. Public consultation on this matter was launched in
2001, cf Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European
Parliament on European Contract Law (COM (2001) 398 final), available from:
cont_law_02_en.pdf>. For details on the development, cf Zimmermann, Reinhard
(2011) ‘Europäisches Privatrecht-Irrungen, Wirrungen’70 Begegnungen im Recht 321
at 329–30 and 338 et seq.
(2014) 1 JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE LAW IN AFRICA50
© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd
vente, hereinafter ‘CESL’) is intended to cover (at least some) fundamental
aspects of sales law in general, rather than merely isolated aspects of consumer
law. Introduced by means of a regulation, the proposed CESL would be
binding in its entirety and directly applicable in the member states.
18
However, in line with the harmonisation approach, the CESL is not
intended to repeal the existing national sales laws, but to function as a ‘29th
legal regime’,
19
in addition to the (approximately) 28 existing sales laws,
20
applicable only if the parties to a contract explicitly select it as the law
governing their contract.
Institutionally, the harmonisation process is backed by the Court of Justice
of the European Union (hereinafter ‘CJEU’). The CJEU interprets EU law
to ensure uniform application throughout the EU.
21
However, it is impor-
tant to note that the CJEU is not a Supreme Court. In private law disputes,
the CJEU does not give final judgments which are directly enforceable in
every member state, but is restricted to answering individual questions posed
by the national courts regarding the interpretation of EU law (preliminary
ruling procedure).
22
The actual final decision is then made by the respective
national court.
In the field of legal education, there have been attempts to institutionalise
cross-border dialogue and to foster convergence, especially by and through
the student-exchange program Erasmus, the European Law Students’ Asso-
ciation (ELSA),
23
the European Law Faculties Association (ELFA),
24
the
European Judicial Training Network (EJTN)
25
and the College of Europe
18
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, art 288(2).
19
The original term is ‘28th legal system’. But since Croatia joined the EU in July
2013, the term had to be adapted; cf Fleischer, Holger (2012) ‘Optionales europäis-
ches Privatrecht (‘‘28. Modell’’)’ 76 Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales
Privatrecht 235; cf also Mankowski, Peter (2012) ‘Der Vorschlag für ein Gemeinsames
Europäisches Kaufrecht (CESL) und das Internationale Privatrecht’ 3 Recht der Inter-
nationalen Wirtschaft 99.
20
There are even more private law systems throughout the EU. See Zimmer-
mann, Reinhard (2012) ‘Codification — The Civilian Experience Reconsidered on
the Eve of a Common European Sales Law’ 8(4) EuropeanReview of Contract Law 367
at 389. Available from:
2166765>
21
See
163/16311.htm>
22
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, art 267.
23
ELSA is an international organisation that ‘offers law students a perfect platform
to develop their existing skills, acquire new skills and meet fellow students and legal
professionals throughout Europe’. Source:
24
The aim of ELFA is, inter alia, ‘to coordinate [the] process of reform of legal
education in Europe, introducing new topics, [and] promoting cooperation between
Universities in Europe’. Source:
25
‘EJTN’s mandate is ‘to help build a genuine European area of justice and to
promote knowledge of legal systems, thereby enhancing the understanding, confi-
dence and cooperation between judges and prosecutors within EU states’. Source:
EFFECTIVE PRIVATE LAW HARMONISATION 51
© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd
(Collège d’Europe).
26
By and large, however, these attempts are few and far
between. Training and examination of lawyers still vary greatly.
27
As far as
legal scholarship is concerned, on the contrary, a relatively strong cross-
border discourse has been established in the last decades. There is a growing
number of journals like the European Review of Private Law (Revue européenne
de droit privé),
28
for example, and of study groups like the Study Group on a
European Civil Code
29
and the Acquis Group
30
dedicated specifically to
European private law.
Comparison
Historical perspective: the status quo ante
As has been shown, both the OHADA Uniform Acts and the EU Draft
Regulation on a Common European Sales Law are designed to enhance and
facilitate legal and economic integration. In addition, OHADA also aims to
‘reinforce legal and judicial security’ (renforcer la sécurité juridique et judiciaire)
and to ‘reinforce the rule of law’ (d’affermissement continu de l’Etat de droit).
31
26
‘Ever since its foundation at the very start of it the College of Europe has had the
mission to make well selected postgraduate students understand the political, legal,
economic and international core issues, challenges and potentials of this unique
process. This not for art’s sake, but to prepare them for leadership functions requiring
a strategic understanding of European issues.’ Source: .coleurope.eu/
website/why-study-college-europe>
27
Cf Wilson, Richard J (2009) ‘Western Europe: Last Holdout in the Worldwide
Acceptance of Clinical Legal Education’ 10 German Law Journal 823 at 839–40. Cf
also Carroll, Wayne J (2004) ‘Liberalization of National LegalAdmissions Require-
ments in the European Union: Lessons and Implications’ 22 Penn State International
Law Review 563 at 568–70.
28
Cf Zimmermann, Reinhard (2008) ‘Europeanization of Private Law’ in
Reimann, Mathias & Zimmermann, Reinhard (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Compar-
ative Law 539 at 556.
29
‘The Study Group on a European Civil Code is a network of academics, from
across the EU, conducting comparative law research in private law in the various
legal jurisdictions of the Member States. Our aim is to produce a codified set of
Principles of European Law for the law of obligations and core aspects of the law of
property.’Source:
30
‘As a reaction on activities of EU institutions in the field of European contract
law, the Acquis Group targets a systematic arrangement of existing Community law
which will help to elucidate the common structures of the emerging Community
private law.’ Source:
private international academic cooperation, cf Zimmermann, Reinhard (2008)
‘Europeanization of Private Law’ in Reimann, Mathias & Zimmermann, Reinhard
(eds) The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Law 539 at 546–7. The European Law
Institute (ELI) has also started projects on European private law — cf, for example,
‘Statement of the European Law Institute on the Proposal for a Regulation on a
Common European Sales Law’, available from:
eu/fileadmin/user_upload/p_eli/Publications/S-2-2012_Statement_on_the_
Proposal_for_a_Regulation_on__a_Common_European_Sales_Law.pdf>
31
Preamble to the Revised OHADATreaty.
(2014) 1 JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE LAW IN AFRICA52
© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd
Here, the OHADA Treatytouches on what is probably the most fundamen-
tal historic difference between OHADA and the EU. OHADAwas founded
primarily as a reaction to the slowdown of foreign investment during the
1980s,
32
due to massive legal uncertainty in the field of business law. There
was a substantial degree of uncertainty as to which law applied (if any), and
where it was possible to identify the applicable law, it was usually grossly
outdated (often still based on 19th century Napoleonic laws) and of low
quality.
33
From such a starting point, virtually any new legislation would
have been an improvement, and it is in fact widely agreed that the Uniform
Acts did improve legal certainty and the quality of business law substantial-
ly.
34
In addition, the public institutions charged with the drafting, application
and implementation of business law were, and still are, relatively weak
throughout the OHADA member states. The situation was, and remains,
characterised by corruption, a shortage of both financial resources and highly
educated legal professionals, and a disregard for the separation of powers
between government and the courts.
35
In this regard, the concentration of
financial and human resources in the sphere of OHADA, and the distance of
the OHADA institutions from the individual member states and the various
‘interest groups’ in the member states provided an opportunity to reduce
these structural deficits. However, this does not mean that OHADA
institutions do not suffer from insufficient funding.
36
In the EU, the situation remains fundamentally different. Each member
state has a relatively complete and functioning, well-tried set of legal rules
32
Mouloul, Alhousseini (2009) Understanding the Organizationfor the Harmonization
of Business Laws in Africa (O.H.A.D.A.) 21.
33
Martor, Boris et al (2007) Business Law in Africa: OHADA and the Harmonization
Process 3 at 16; Tumnde,Martha Simo (2002) ‘The Applicability of the Ohada Treaty
in Cameroon: Problems and Prospects’ Annales de la Faculté des Sciences Juridiques et
Politiques 23, available from:
index/assoc/HASH6da3.dir/applicability-ohada-treaty-cameroon.pdf>. On the
history of OHADA, cf Mbaye, Kéba (2004) ‘L’histoire et les objectifs de l’OHADA’
205 Petites Affiches 4; Kirsch, Martin (1998) ‘Historique de l’Organisation pour
l’harmonisation du droit des affaires en Afrique (OHADA)’108(827) Penant: revue de
droit des pays d’Afrique 129. On harmonisation and unification in Africa in general, cf
Alliot, Michel (1967) ‘Problemes de l’unification des droits africains’ 11 Journal of
African Law 86 at 88; Bamodu, Gbenga (1994) ‘Transnational Law, Unification and
Harmonization of International Commercial Law in Africa’ 38(2) Journal ofAfrican
Law 125.
34
Cf, for example, Dickerson, Claire Moore (2005) ‘Harmonizing Business Laws
in Africa: OHADACalls the Tune’ 44(1) Columbia Journal of TransnationalLaw 17.
With a focus on the impact on the Democratic Republic of the Congo, cf Masamba,
Roger (2009) ‘Avantages comparatifs des actes uniformes de l’OHADA’ 119(869)
Penant: revue de droitdes pays d’Afrique 489.
35
Cf Vogl, Thorsten (2009) ‘La lutte contre la corruption: condition essentielle
pour la réussite de l’OHADA’119(867) Penant: revue de droit des pays d’Afrique 206;
Negre, Christophe (2008) ‘Legal Uncertainty is an Obstacle to the Efficiency of
OHADA Law’6 International Business Law Journal 757.
36
Ahoyo, André-Franck (2008) ‘La problématique du financement de l’OHADA’
118(865) Penant: revuede droit des pays d’Afrique 428.
EFFECTIVE PRIVATE LAW HARMONISATION 53
© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd
regarding contract and business law,
37
and there are relatively clear and
uniform rules in place that determine which national law is applicable to
cross-border contracts.
38
Thus, it is not clear from the outset that virtually
every new EU directive or regulation brings with it an improvement of the
legal situation in every member state. Quite to the contrary, it is frequently
questioned and debated whether EU law actually enhances legal certainty
and immediately ‘improves’ the quality of the law applicable, compared to
the status quo ante. If the introduction of new EU law threatens to deteriorate
legal certainty and the quality of the law in a member state, this detriment
must be offset by the advantages of harmonisation for the single market as a
whole.
39
In the case of the recent Proposal for a Regulation on a Common
European Sales Law, this objection is advanced in two ways. First, no more
than two months after the publication of the CESL, the German Parliament
registered a subsidiarity objection with the EU, complaining, inter alia, that
the EU lacks legal competence (jurisdiction) to enact a general common
European sales law, and that such a common European sales law is not
necessary as it will not enhance transnational trade.
40
Secondly, scholars have
offered exceptionally harsh criticism on the quality of the CESL.
41
To go into
detail regarding the criticisms of the CESL would be beyond the scope of this
paper. What is important to recognise, however, is that the content-related
objections imply no less rejection of the project as a whole than the
competence and subsidiary related ones.
At this point, it is useful to recall that the Commission decided to propose
the introduction of the CESL as an optional instrument, a ‘29th legal regime’,
only.Accordingly, one might be tempted to insidiously argue that the CESL
— however deficient — cannot disrupt national legal systems, but that it will
37
Cf Zimmermann, Reinhard (2012) ‘Codification — The Civilian Experience
Reconsidered on the Eve of a Common European Sales Law’ 8(4) EuropeanReview of
Contract Law 367 at 380 and 385–6. Available from:
papers.cfm?abstract_id=2166765>
38
For the Rome I regulation in the context of CESL, cf Mankowski, Peter (2012)
‘Der Vorschlag für ein Gemeinsames Europäisches Kaufrecht (CESL) und das Inter-
nationale Privatrecht’3 Recht der Internationalen Wirtschaft 97.
39
In other words: ‘The crucial question is whether the cost of the existing
diversity is greater than the cost of the new regime’; Thyssen, Marianne (2012)
‘Opinion of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs for the Committee
on Legal Affairs on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of
the Council on a Common European Sales Law’, available from:
europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/1832/MARIANNE_THYSSEN_activities.html>
40
Bundestag Drucksache 17/8000 of 30.11.2011.
41
For content-related criticism by legal scholars see, for example, Eidenmüller,
Horst et al (2008) ‘The Common Frame of Reference for European Private Law —
Policy Choices and Codification Problems’ 28(4) Oxford Journal of Legal Studies
659; Eidenmüller, Horst et al (2012) ‘Der Vorschlag für eine Verordnung über ein
Gemeinsames Europäisches Kaufrecht’ 6 Juristenzeitung 269. More confident: Ayad,
Patrick & Schnell, Sebastian (2012) ‘Gemeinsames Europäisches Kaufrecht — für
Unternehmen attraktiv?’Betriebsberater 1487 at 1495.
(2014) 1 JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE LAW IN AFRICA54
© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd
be up to the market to test the new law and to approve it (by opting in) or
not.
42
But such a ‘law as a product’ view is both short-sighted and dangerous.
First, from a legal point of view, the introduction of the CESLas law gives the
text — optional or not — ultimate authority. However deficient, as law in
force the CESL will serve as a reference text in academic discourse or even as
a model text for national lawmakers.
43
This might limit or even hinder future
development in the field of private law. Resources will be wasted in battles
over the CESL that could be used better elsewhere.
44
Secondly, from a
political point of view, a highly deficient CESL that is at the same time
perceived as a symbol of European unity
45
might provoke anti-European
sentiment and thereby backfire on the project of European integration as a
whole.
46
The legal text
At first glance, OHADA’s approach to unification seems to be ideal. Uniform
Acts are directly applicable in all member states, and the prevailing language
is French. As a result, one and the same text applies in all member states. In
addition, OHADA Uniform Acts repeal any inconsistent national laws.
Consequently, the point of departure for the application and interpretation of
OHADA law is exactly the same in every member state.
Upon closer examination, however, the situation is probably not as ideal as
it might first appear. First, abrogation of inconsistent national law does not
take place by means of explicit inventories which list any repealed provision,
but rather tacitly.
47
In addition, it does not cover any national legislation and
42
This point is mentioned in Herresthal, Carsten (2011) ‘Ein europäisches Ver-
tragsrecht als Optionales Instrument’Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 7at8.
43
Eidenmüller, Horst et al (2012) ‘Der Vorschlag für eine Verordnung über ein
Gemeinsames Europäisches Kaufrecht’ 6 Juristenzeitung 269 at 287; Herresthal,
Carsten (2011) ‘Ein europäisches Vertragsrecht als Optionales Instrument’ Europäische
Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht7at8.
44
Zimmermann, Reinhard (2012) ‘Codification — The Civilian Experience
Reconsidered on the Eve of a Common European Sales Law’ 8(4) EuropeanReview of
Contract Law 367 at 399. Available from:
abstract_id=2166765>. Herresthal, Carsten (2011) ‘Ein europäisches Vertragsrecht
als Optionales Instrument’ Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 7 at 8 presents the
counterargument that competition between CESL and the national laws might foster
further development.
45
Codifications were often intended to serve as such symbols. See Zimmermann,
Reinhard (2012) ‘Codification — The Civilian Experience Reconsidered on the
Eve of a Common European Sales Law’ 8(4) European Review of Contract Law 367 at
390. Available from:
2166765>
46
Likewise ‘counterproductive’. See Zimmermann, Reinhard (2012) ‘Codifica-
tion — The Civilian Experience Reconsidered on the Eve of a Common European
Sales Law’ 8(4) European Review of Contract Law 367 at 390.Available from:
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2166765>
47
Beauchard, Renaud & Kodo, Mahutodji Jimmy Vital (2011) Can OHADA
Increase Legal Certainty in Africa? (Justice and Development Working Paper Series No
EFFECTIVE PRIVATE LAW HARMONISATION 55
© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd
case law on the subject matter of the respective Uniform Act, but rather those
provisions of the national law that are identical or contrary to the respective
Uniform Act.
48
This limited, tacit abrogation runs the risk of creating a
significant degree of legal uncertainty if the national laws are not aligned to
the Uniform Acts. In the end, it is up to the courts to decide in a case-by-case
approach whether, and to what extent, the national laws in question are
identical or contrary to OHADA law and therefore null and void.
49
This
problem might be relativised, however, by the fact that the national laws
dealing with business issues are, generally speaking, of low quality, if existent
or identifiable at all (see above). This might allow the courts to be generous
with regards to the interpretation of the OHADA UniformActs, and to base
their decision on, or to derive principles from, OHADA law as far as possible,
instead of making recourse to national laws.
Secondly, the monolingual approach towards OHADA law is currently
subject to criticism. Scholars and judges from Cameroon have expressed
concern that the French-only policy might violate Cameroon’s constitution,
which guarantees the equal status of both French and English as official
languages in the country.
50
Moreover, the question of whether a monolin-
gual approach is justifiable will become more and more acute, should
OHADA further extend its borders beyond francophoneAfrica.
51
17, World Bank) 26. Available from:
LAWJUSTINST/Resources/17-2011CanOHADAIncrease.pdf?resourceurlname=
17-2011CanOHADAIncrease.pdf>
48
CCJA, Advisory Opinion of April 30, 2001, Avis No 001/2001/EP; cited by
Beauchard & Kodo at 48.
49
See the profound critique by Beauchard & Kodo at 48.
50
With further reference to an unreported decision of Justice Ayah Paul from
2000, cf Tumnde, Martha Simo (2002) ‘The Applicability of the Ohada Treaty in
Cameroon: Problems and Prospects’ Annales de la Faculté des Sciences Juridiques et
Politiques 23 at 27, available from:
dohada/index/assoc/HASH6da3.dir/applicability-ohada-treaty-cameroon.pdf>.
See also Enonchong, Nelson (2007) ‘The Harmonization of Business Law in Africa:
Is Article 42 of the OHADA Treaty a Problem?’ 51(1) Journal of African Law 95. It
has to be noted that both articles are concerned with the pre-revision version of art 42
of the OHADATreaty, which did not provide for the drafting of English translations.
51
Reportedly, Ghana and Nigeria have expressed some preliminary interest in
joining OHADA: Beauchard, Renaud & Kodo, Mahutodji Jimmy Vital (2011) Can
OHADA Increase Legal Certainty in Africa? (Justice and Development Working Paper
Series No 17, WorldBank) 18, available from:
EXTLAWJUSTINST/Resources/17-2011CanOHADAIncrease.pdf?
resourceurlname=17-2011CanOHADAIncrease.pdf>. On the language problem, cf
Fagbayibo, Babatunde (2009) ‘Towards the Harmonisation of Laws in Africa: Is
OHADA the Way to Go?’ 42(3) The Comparative and International Law Journal of
Southern Africa 309, which identifies language differences as a main impediment to
African legal harmonisation; Amegatcher, Andrew Ofoe (2008) ‘The OHADA
Treaty from Anglophone Perspectives’2 Ghana Policy Journal 111; Dickerson, Claire
Moore (2008) ‘Le droit de l’OHADA dans les états anglophones et ses probléma-
tiques linguistiques’6 Revue de droit des affaires internationales 743.
(2014) 1 JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE LAW IN AFRICA56
© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd
The EU, on the other hand, already has 24 official working languages.
52
Every piece of legislation and every decision of the CJEU must be published
in all official working languages. Consequently, the future Regulation on a
Common European Sales Law will be published in all 24 official EU working
languages as well. The national courts will then apply the version provided in
their native language. However, there is no provision regarding which text
should prevail in case of ambiguity or inconsistency. Moreover,providing 24
official translations of the CESL will hinder the development of an autono-
mous, EU-law-specific interpretation of legal terms and concepts, as most
judges and scholars will address the CESL in their language and thus will
instinctively bring their way of legal thinking into play.
53
This is all the more
likely given that the CESL does not actually aim to provide a complete,
self-standing set of rules regarding all aspects of sales law. On the contrary, it is
intentionally incomplete.
54
For example, it does not contain any provisions
regarding the transfer of ownership.
55
Consequently, there is no regulation of
assignment of goods or reservation of ownership as security, although both
are pivotal elements of sales law in a wider sense of the word. It is left to the
national laws to fill in these gaps. The end result will not be a single common
European sales law, but 24 (related to the number of official translations) or
even more (related to the number of national legal systems applicable to fill in
the gaps) such European sales laws — besides the national sales laws already
existing.
The courts
Unification or harmonisation of legal texts is one thing, but a uniform or
harmonised application thereof is another. It seems quite obvious that a
52
See
budget-of-the-European-Parliament.html>
53
Likewise ‘language cannot, on a European level, serve the function of a cultural
glue’: Zimmermann, Reinhard (2012) ‘Codification — The Civilian Experience
Reconsidered on the Eve of a Common European Sales Law’ 8(4) EuropeanReview of
Contract Law 367 at 391. Available from:
abstract_id=2166765>. Staudenmayer, Dirk (ed) (2014) Common European Sales Law
(German edition: Gemeinsames Europäisches Kaufrecht), for example, is an article-by-
article commentary on the CESL published in both German and English. However,
both commentaries are written solely by authors with a German legal background.
Therefore, despite the bilingual approach, which will undeniably contribute to the
internationalisation of the discourse, the commentary will likely still be a German
perspective on the CESL. For a French perspective on the language issue, cf Claret,
Hélène (2012) ‘Le défi du langage (Déterminabilité d’un droit européen des contrats
et pluralisme linguistique)’ in Quézel-Ambrunaz, Christophe (ed) Les defies de
l’harmonisation européenne du droitdes contrats 47.
54
One reason is that the scope of the EU’s jurisdiction over private law matters is
highly contested; cf the German Parliament’s subsidiarity objection as set out above.
55
Likewise critical is Thyssen, Marianne (2012) ‘Opinion of the Committee on
Economic and Monetary Affairs for the Committee on LegalAffairs on the Proposal
for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Common
European Sales Law’ at 4. Available from:
en/1832/MARIANNE_THYSSEN_activities.html>
EFFECTIVE PRIVATE LAW HARMONISATION 57
© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd
common Supreme Court is necessary to ensure a minimum degree of
uniformity in the interpretation and application of the law.
The OHADA member states responded to this self-evident matter and
created the CCJA. The CCJA functions as the Supreme Court in all matters
of OHADA law. It makes final judgments that are enforceable in all member
states (see above). This ensures that its decisions will be observed by the lower
courts, as that lower court’s decision would otherwise be quashed by the
CCJA. In addition, OHADA has even enacted a Uniform Act Organising
Simplified Recovery Procedures and Measures of Execution to ensure a
unified approach to, inter alia, the execution of court orders.
56
It should be noted, however, that in practice the CCJA does not (and
perhaps cannot) perform its duties perfectly, mainly for two reasons. First, the
exact scope of its jurisdiction is unclear. According to art 14(3) of the
OHADA Treaty, the CCJA has jurisdiction ‘for all matters involving the
application of the uniform acts’. Problems arise if an interpretation and
application of both a Uniform Act and national law (especially general civil
law) is necessary.
57
To what extent can the CCJAinterpret and apply national
law? And who actually has the final authority to answer that question, the
CCJA or the national Supreme or Constitutional Courts?
58
In addition, despite the fact that the CCJA’s decisions are directly
enforceable in every member state, and despite the fact that enforcement
measures are unified,
59
enforcement still depends on national institutions. In
practice, these state institutions tasked with carrying out the enforcement of
court orders are all too often unavailable or dysfunctional.
60
In the EU, the situation is very different. There is no such thing as an EU
56
Acte Uniforme Portant Organisation des Procédures Simplifiées de Recouvrement et des
Voiesd’Exécution, adopté le 10/04/1998.
57
Beauchard, Renaud & Kodo, Mahutodji Jimmy Vital (2011) Can OHADA
Increase Legal Certainty in Africa? (Justice and Development Working Paper Series
No 17, World Bank) 23. Available from:
EXTLAWJUSTINST/Resources/17-2011CanOHADAIncrease.pdf?
resourceurlname=17-2011CanOHADAIncrease.pdf>
58
The Niger Supreme Court has already provided an answer to the first question,
thereby implicitly answering also the second: if a case rests primarily on a Uniform
Act, it is up to the CCJA to decide on the merits. If a case rests primarily on national
law,the Niger Supreme Court will decide without referring the case to the CCJA. Cf
Beauchard & Kodo 23–4 with reference to Niger Sup Ct, Au 16, 2001, RBD 2002 at
121. See also Ndam, Ibrahim (2012) ‘La coordination de souverainetés dans l’espace
OHADA’122(878) Penant: revue de droit des pays d’Afrique 53.
59
For a critical analysis, see Nkea Ndzigue, Francis (2010) ‘Les droits du débiteur
dans le système OHADA des voies d’exécution’120(873) Penant: revue de droit des pays
d’Afrique 405.
60
Beauchard & Kodo 30. For an interesting insight on the ‘disparity that exists
between real-life socioeconomic behavior of Beninese merchants and the law-of-
the-books’, see Deschamps, Isabelle (2011) ‘Commercial Law Reform in Africa: A
Means of Socio-Economic Development, But for Whom?’, available from:
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2013704>
(2014) 1 JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE LAW IN AFRICA58
© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd
Supreme Court,
61
and there is no intention to create one. The CJEU’s
involvement in contract law disputes is restricted to giving a binding opinion
on specific legal issues arising with regards to the interpretation of EU law.
This will not be changed by the Regulation on a Common European Sales
Law. It remains the exclusive task of the national Supreme Courts to finally
decide on the merits of a case, even where the parties to a contract have opted
for the application of the CESL. And when applying the CESL, the courts of
the EU member states will most likely face difficulties quite similar to those
faced by the courts of the OHADA member states: it will be impossible to
determine the exact boundaries of the CESL. For example, if a contract
contains a clause on the reservation of ownership as security, the exact scope
of which is unclear, will the courts have to interpret that clause according to
principles of the CESL, or according to principles of the respective national
law of ownership, or both?
62
And is it therefore possible or — at least for the
national Supreme Courts — compulsory to refer such a question to the
CJEU? All this will create a significant degree of legal uncertainty and legal
fragmentation.
63
The only way to get the CJEU involved to ensure legal certainty and avoid
legal fragmentation is by means of the preliminary ruling procedure (see
above). But the problem here is that the CJEU does not have anywhere near
the capacity to deal with questions regarding the CESL from all over
61
Zimmermann, Reinhard (2012) ‘Codification — The Civilian Experience
Reconsidered on the Eve of a Common European Sales Law’ 8(4) EuropeanReview of
Contract Law 367 at 395, available from:
abstract_id=2166765>. See also Grigoleit, Hans Christoph (2012) ‘Der Entwurf für
ein Gemeinsames Europäisches Kaufrecht: Funktionsbedingungen, EU-Kompetenz
und Perspektiven’ in Remien, Oliver et al (eds) Gemeinsames EuropäischesKaufrecht für
die EU? 67, 70–3.
62
According to recital 29 of the Proposal for a Regulation of the European
Parliament and of the Council on a Common European Sales Law, internal gaps —
ie ‘questions concerning matters falling within the scope of the Common European
Sales Law which are not expressly settled by it’ — should be resolved only by
interpretation of its rules without recourse to any other law, whereas, according to
recital 27, external gaps — ie ‘all the matters of a contractual or non-contractual
nature that are not addressed in the Common European Sales Law — are governed by
the pre-existing rules of the national law outside the Common European Sales Law
that is applicable under Regulations (EC) No 593/2008 and (EC) No 864/2007 or
any other relevant conflict of law rule. These issues include [. . .] the transfer of
ownership’ (emphasis added). Available from:
LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2011:0635:FIN:en:PDF>
63
With reference to identical problems arising under Contracts for International
Sale of Goods (CISG), cf Gsell, Beate (2012) ‘Der Verordnungsentwurf für ein
Gemeinsames Europäisches Kaufrecht und die Problematik seiner Lücken’ in
Remien, Oliver et al (eds) Gemeinsames Europäisches Kaufrecht für die EU? 145 at 148;
cf also Herresthal, Carsten (2011) ‘Ein europäisches Vertragsrecht als Optionales
Instrument’Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 7 at 8–9.
EFFECTIVE PRIVATE LAW HARMONISATION 59
© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd
Europe.
64
Moreover, within the bounds of the preliminary ruling procedure,
the CJEU can deal only with isolated and abstract legal questions referred to
it by the national courts, as opposed to an exhaustive and independent
examination of the factual and legal basis of a case. The questions referred to
the CJEU by the national courts consider only isolated aspects of EU law,
65
which prevents the CJEU from systematically developing a concise and
guiding approach to EU law. This might be acceptable where a relatively
confined and narrow legal framework is concerned, as it is with the current
EU directives on consumer protection, for example. However, with respect
to the CESL with its hundreds of provisions, explicit and hidden underlying
principles and agendas, very broad economic and other implications, et
cetera, it is not.
66
In this regard one must also take into account that before
the CJEU, the language of the case shall be the language of the referring
court, and any item or document that is expressed in another language must
be translated into the language of the case.
67
This procedural rule further
perpetuates fragmentation along language borders.
Legal education and tradition
Only with a common approach to the law in general will lawyers,
practitioners, business people, judges, administrative bodies, et cetera,
address concrete legal questions in a way that makes a more or less consistent,
homogenous development and application of the law possible.
The OHADA member states understand this, at least in principle. With
ERSUMA, they founded an institution that educates and trains lawyers,
judges, et cetera, of the member states in matters of OHADA law. In
addition, almost all OHADA member states are former French colonies.
Thus there is presumably a sufficient degree of uniformity in legal thinking
and methodology throughout the member states in the field of business
64
Zimmermann, Reinhard (2012) ‘Perspektiven des künftigen österreichischen
und europäischen Zivilrechts — Zum Verordnungsvorschlagüber ein Gemeinsames
Europäisches Kaufrecht’134(1) Juristische Blätter 2at20.
65
For example, a question: ‘Are the provisions of the first and second subpara-
graphs of Article 3(3) of [the Directive] to be interpreted as precluding a national
statutory provision under which, in the event of a lack of conformity of the consumer
goods delivered, the seller may refuse the type of remedy required by the consumer
when the remedy would result in the seller incurring costs which, compared with the
value the consumer goods would have if there were no lack of conformity, and with
the significance of the lack of conformity, would be unreasonable (absolutely
disproportionate)?’ Answer: ‘Article 3(2) and (3) of [the Directive] must be inter-
preted as meaning that (. . .)’— judgement of the Court (First Chamber) in Joined
Cases C-65/09 and C-87/09, 16 June 2011 (‘Weber’).
66
Grigoleit, Hans Christoph (2012) ‘Der Entwurf für ein Gemeinsames Europäis-
ches Kaufrecht: Funktionsbedingungen, EU-Kompetenz und Perspektiven’ in
Remien, Oliver et al (eds) Gemeinsames Europäisches Kaufrechtfür die EU? 70 et seq.
67
Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, arts 37(3) and 38(2).
(2014) 1 JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE LAW IN AFRICA60
© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd
law.
68
On the other hand, there is no way around admitting that ERSUMA
lacks resources and de facto seems to be unable to carry out its mission
effectively.
69
In the EU, legal education is still the exclusive task of the member states,
and thus varies greatly. Although there is an increasing discourse between
scholars and practitioners of the different member states, no common legal
tradition and legal methodology has yet emerged that could provide
guidance for the further development of the CESL.
70
The same holds true
with respect to the weighting and adjustment of competing values underly-
ing virtually any private law provision, such as party autonomy and social
protection.
71
In this regard, the inflationary use of open terms (blankets) in
the Draft Regulation on a Common European Sales Law will contribute to
legal fragmentation to a degree that even on its own calls the reasonableness
of the whole project into question.
72
With that said, the recommendation of
the EU Parliament’s Legal Affairs Committee on the Draft Regulation on
a Common European Sales Law to encourage the EU Commission ‘to
organise training both for legal practitioners and for representative profes-
68
If one looks at the differences between francophone and English-speaking
Africa, on the contrary, the situation is more similar to that in the EU; cf Alliot,
Michel (1967) ‘Problemes de l’unification des droits africains’11 Journal of African Law
86 at 94–97; Fagbayibo, Babatunde (2009) ‘Towards the Harmonisation of Laws in
Africa: Is OHADA the Way to Go?’ 42(3) The Comparative and International Law
Journal of Southern Africa 309, which identifies differences in legal tradition as a main
impediment to African legal harmonisation.
69
Beauchard, Renaud & Kodo, Mahutodji Jimmy Vital (2011) Can OHADA
Increase Legal Certainty in Africa? (Justice and Development Working Paper Series No
17, World Bank) 28, available from:
EXTLAWJUSTINST/Resources/17-2011CanOHADAIncrease.pdf?
resourceurlname=17-2011CanOHADAIncrease.pdf>. See also Negre, Christophe
(2008) ‘Legal Uncertainty is an Obstacle to the Efficiency of OHADA Law’ 6
International Business Law Journal 757.
70
For the importance of the ‘concepts on which [different legal systems] rely, in
the methods which their lawyers use, and in the standards of conduct to which they
refer’ cf, for example, David, René (1968) ‘The Methods of Unification’16(1/2) The
American Journal of Comparative Law 13 at 15.
71
For both aspects, cf Grigoleit, Hans Christoph (2012) ‘Der Entwurf für ein
Gemeinsames Europäisches Kaufrecht: Funktionsbedingungen, EU-Kompetenz
und Perspektiven’ in Remien, Oliver et al (eds) Gemeinsames EuropäischesKaufrecht für
die EU? 73.
72
Eidenmüller, Horst et al (2008) ‘The Common Frame of Reference for Euro-
pean Private Law — Policy Choices and Codification Problems’ 28(4) OxfordJournal
of Legal Studies 659. For a more optimistic view, see Chamboredon,Anthony (2000)
‘The Debate on a European Civil Code: For an ‘‘Open texture’’’ in Van Hoecke,
Mark & Ost, Francois (eds) The Harmonisation of European Private Law 63 passim.
Some authors even discuss whether ‘general clauses should be exempted from the
principle of autonomous interpretation’, which would demolish the project of
creating a common European sales law all together: Rott, Peter (2005) ‘What is the
Role of the ECJ in EC Private Law — AComment on the ECJ Judgments in Oceano
Grupo, Freiburger Kommunalbauten, Leitner and Veedfald’ 1(1) Hanse Law Review
6, available from: g/pdf/Vol1No1Art1.pdf>
EFFECTIVE PRIVATE LAW HARMONISATION 61
© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd
sional and inter-professional business organisations’,
73
deserves support but
can hardly be considered to be more than a drop in the bucket.
Conclusion
OHADA has taken the path of unification. The OHADAUniform Acts are
self-contained and repeal, in their field of application, any inconsistent law of
any member state. This unification of the law is grounded upon a relatively
high degree of linguistic, judicial and discursive unity. Every UniformAct is
or will be made available in French, English, Spanish and Portuguese, but the
French version prevails in the case of any ambiguity. With the CCJA, the
member states have created a proper supreme court for OHADA law. Finally,
since most member states are former French colonies, legal tradition in the
field of business law is relatively similar (mainly civilian), ensuring a common
approach to the law and enabling academics and practitioners, accompanied
by ERSUMA, to join into an OHADA-wide academic discourse.
The EU, on the contrary, has chosen to take the path of harmonisation.
The Common European Sales Law will not seek to substitute the sales laws of
the member states with one single set of rules, but will provide a ‘29th legal
regime’ in addition to the existing national sales laws, applicable if the parties
to a contract select it as the law governing their contract. It will be published
in 24 languages, none of which will prevail in the case of any ambiguity.
There will be no proper Supreme Court providing for a consistent,
homogenous judicial approach to the Common European Sales Law. Finally,
since legal education and tradition vary greatly between member states (not
only between common law and civil law jurisdictions, but also in between
them), a common academic approach to the Common European Sales Law
seems to be a distant possibility.
Regarding the Common European Sales Law, the fundamental question
that remains to be answered is whether the nature of mere harmonisation
allows for it to succeed, despite the lack of linguistic, judicial and discursive
unity, or if not, whether the necessary prerequisites of effective harmonisa-
tion can be created in the future. Regarding the unification process under
OHADA, the fundamental question which remains to be answered is
whether the lack of funding and support from and within the member states,
as well as the implementation problems, can be overcome. It would seem
that both the EU and OHADA could learn something from each other.
73
Thyssen, Marianne (2012) ‘Opinion of the Committee on Economic and
Monetary Affairs for the Committee on Legal Affairs on the Proposal for a Regula-
tion of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Common European Sales
Law’ at 7. Available from:
MARIANNE_THYSSEN_activities.html>
(2014) 1 JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE LAW IN AFRICA62
© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd
REFERENCES
Ahoyo, André-Franck (2008) ‘La problématique du financement de l’OHADA’
118(865) Penant: revuede droit des pays d’Afrique 428.
Alliot, Michel (1967) ‘Problemes de l’unification des droits africains’11 Journal of Afri-
can Law 86.
Allott, Anthony (1968) ‘The Unification of Laws inAfrica’ 16 The American Journal of
Comparative Law 51.
Amegatcher,Andrew Ofoe (2008) ‘The OHADA Treaty from Anglophone Perspec-
tives’2 Ghana Policy Journal 111 .
Ayad,Patrick & Schnell, Sebastian (2012) ‘Gemeinsames Europäisches Kaufrecht —
für Unternehmen attraktiv?’Betriebsberater 1487.
Bamodu, Gbenga (1994) ‘Transnational Law,Unification and Harmonization of
International Commercial Law in Africa’38(2) Journal of African Law 125.
Beauchard, Renaud & Kodo, Mahutodji Jimmy Vital(2011) Can OHADA Increase
Legal Certainty in Africa? (Justice and Development WorkingPaper Series No
17, World Bank). Available from:
EXTLAWJUSTINST/Resources/17-2011 CanOHADAIncrease.pdf?
resourceurlname=17-2011CanOHADAIncrease.pdf>
Bolmin, Monique, Bouillet-Cordonnier, Ghislaine & Medjad, Karin (1994) ‘Har-
monisation du troit des affaires dans la Zone Franc’121(2) Journal du droit inter-
national 375.
Carroll, WayneJ (2004) ‘Liberalization of National Legal Admissions Requirements
in the European Union: Lessons and Implications’22 Penn State International
Law Review 563.
Chamboredon, Anthony (2000) ‘The Debate on a European Civil Code: For an
‘‘Opentexture’’ ’in Van Hoecke, Mark & Ost, Francois (eds) The Harmonisa-
tion of European Private Law 63.
Claret, Hélène (2012) ‘Le défi du langage (Déterminabilité d’un droit européen des
contrats et pluralisme linguistique)’in Quézel-Ambrunaz, Christophe (ed) Les
defies de l’harmonisation européenne du droitdes contrats 47.
David, René (1968) ‘The Methods of Unification’16(1/2) The American Journal of
Comparative Law 13.
Deschamps, Isabelle (2011) ‘Commercial Law Reform inAfrica: A Means of Socio-
Economic Development, But for Whom?’ Available from:
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2013704>
Diallo, Bakary (2007) ‘Réflexions sur le pouvoir d’évocation de la Cour Commune
de Justice et d’Arbitrage dans le cadre du traité de l’OHADA’117(858) Penant:
revue de droitdes pays d’Afrique 40.
Dickerson, Claire Moore (2005) ‘Harmonizing Business Laws in Africa: OHADA
Calls the Tune’44(1) Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 17.
Dickerson, Claire Moore (2008) ‘Le droit de l’OHADA dans les états anglophones et
ses problématiques linguistiques’6 Revue de droit des affaires internationales 743.
Douajni, Gaston Kenfack (2009) ‘L’expérienceinternationale de la Cour commune
de justice et d’arbitrage (CCJA) de l’Organisation pour l’harmonisation en
Afrique du droit des affaires (OHADA)’119(868) Penant: revue de droit des pays
d’Afrique 356.
Eidenmüller, Horst et al (2008) ‘The Common Frame of Reference for European
Private Law — Policy Choices and Codification Problems’28(4) Oxford Journal
of Legal Studies 659.
EFFECTIVE PRIVATE LAW HARMONISATION 63
© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd
Eidenmüller, Horst et al (2012) ‘Der Vorschlag für eine Verordnung über ein
Gemeinsames Europäisches Kaufrecht’6 Juristenzeitung 269.
Enonchong, Nelson (2007) ‘The Harmonization of Business Law in Africa: IsArticle
42 of the OHADATreaty a Problem?’ 51(1) Journal of African Law 95.
Fagbayibo, Babatunde (2009) ‘Towards the Harmonisation of Laws inAfrica: Is
OHADA theWay to Go?’ 42(3) The Comparative and International Law Journal
of Southern Africa 309.
Fleischer, Holger (2012) ‘Optionales europäisches Privatrecht (‘‘28.Modell’’)’ 76
Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht 235.
Gout, Olivier (2012) ‘L’harmonisation du droit des affaires enAfrique: le droit
OHADA’in Quézel-Ambrunaz, Christophe (ed) Les défis de l’harmonisation
européenne du droitdes contrats 17.
Grigoleit, Hans Christoph (2012) ‘Der Entwurf für ein Gemeinsames Europäisches
Kaufrecht: Funktionsbedingungen, EU-Kompetenz und Perspektiven’ in
Remien, Oliver et al (eds) Gemeinsames Europäisches Kaufrechtfür die EU? 67.
Gsell, Beate (2012) ‘Der Verordnungsentwurffür ein Gemeinsames Europäisches
Kaufrecht und die Problematik seiner Lücken’in Remien, Oliver et al (eds)
Gemeinsames Europäisches Kaufrechtfür die EU? 145.
Herresthal, Carsten (2011) ‘Ein europäisches Vertragsrecht als Optionales Instru-
ment’Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 7.
Kirsch, Martin (1998) ‘Historique de l’Organisation pour l’harmonisation du droit
des affaires en Afrique (OHADA)’ 108(827) Penant: revue de droit des pays
d’Afrique 129.
Mankowski, Peter (2012) ‘Der Vorschlag für ein Gemeinsames Europäisches Kaufre-
cht (CESL) und das Internationale Privatrecht’ 3 Recht der Internationalen
Wirtschaft 97.
Martor, Boris et al (2007) Business Law in Africa: OHADAand the Harmonization Pro-
cess 3.
Masamba, Roger (2009) ‘Avantagescomparatifs des actes uniformes de l’OHADA’
119(869) Penant: revuede droit des pays d’Afrique 489.
Mbaye, Kéba (2004) ‘L’histoireet les objectifs de l’OHADA’205 Petites Af fiches 4.
Mouloul, Alhousseini (2008) Comprendre L’Organisation pour L’Harmonisation en
Afrique du Droit des Affaires.
Mouloul, Alhousseini (2009) Understanding the Organization for the Harmonization of
Business Laws in Africa (O.H.A.D.A.).
Ndam, Ibrahim (2012) ‘La coordination de souverainetés dans l’espace OHADA’
122(878) Penant: revue de droitdes pays d’Afrique 53.
Negre, Christophe (2008) ‘Legal Uncertainty is an Obstacle to the Efficiency of
OHADA Law’6 International Business Law Journal 757.
Nkea Ndzigue, Francis (2010) ‘Les droits du débiteur dans le système OHADA des
voies d’exécution’120(873) Penant: revue de droit des pays d’Afrique 405.
Quézel-Ambrunaz, Christophe (ed) (2012) Les défis de l’harmonisation européenne du
droit des contrats.
Reimann, Mathias & Zimmermann, Reinhard (eds) (2008) The Oxford Handbook of
Comparative Law.
Remien, Oliver et al (eds) (2012) Gemeinsames Europäisches Kaufrechtfür die EU?
Rott, Peter (2005) ‘What is the Role of the ECJ in EC Private Law — AComment
on the ECJ Judgments in Oceano Grupo, Freiburger Kommunalbauten, Leit-
ner and Veedfald’ 1(1) Hanse Law Review 6. Available from:
www.hanselawreview.org/pdf/Vol1No1Art1.pdf>
(2014) 1 JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE LAW IN AFRICA64
© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd
Thyssen, Marianne (2012) ‘Opinion of the Committee on Economic and Monetary
Affairs for the Committee on Legal Affairs on the Proposal for a Regulation of
the European Parliament and of the Council on a Common European Sales
Law’. Availablefrom:
MARIANNE_THYSSEN_activities.html>
Tumnde, Martha Simo (2002) ‘TheApplicability of the Ohada Treaty in Cameroon:
Problems and Prospects’Annales de la Faculté des Sciences Juridiques et Politiques
23. Available from: g/greenstone/collect/dohada/
index/assoc/HASH6da3.dir/applicability-ohada-treaty-cameroon.pdf>
VanHoecke, Mark & Ost, Francois (eds) (2000) The Harmonisation of European Private
Law.
Vogl,Thorsten (2009) ‘La lutte contre la corruption: condition essentielle pour la
réussite de l’OHADA’119(867) Penant: revue de droitdes pays d’Afrique 206.
Wilson, Richard J (2009) ‘WesternEurope: Last Holdout in the WorldwideAccep-
tance of Clinical Legal Education’10 German Law Journal 823.
Zimmermann, Reinhard (2008) ‘Europeanization of Private Law’ in Reimann,
Mathias & Zimmermann, Reinhard (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Comparative
Law 539.
Zimmermann, Reinhard (2011) ‘Europäisches Privatrecht-Irrungen, Wirrungen’70
Begegnungen im Recht 321.
Zimmermann, Reinhard (2012) ‘Codification — The Civilian Experience Recon-
sidered on the Eve of a Common European Sales Law’8(4) European Review of
Contract Law 367. Available from:
abstract_id=2166765>
Zimmermann, Reinhard (2012) ‘Perspektiven des künftigen österreichischen und
europäischen Zivilrechts — Zum Verordnungsvorschlagüber ein Gemein-
sames Europäisches Kaufrecht’134(1) Juristische Blätter 2.
EFFECTIVE PRIVATE LAW HARMONISATION 65
© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd
To continue reading
Request your trial