Report on the 2025 NGPIL Conference: The Politicization of Private International Law

On 11 and 12 June 2025, the Nordic Group on Private International Law (NGPIL) held a conference in Stockholm.

NGPIL is an informal group consisting of lawyers interested in the field of private international law. Founded in Uppsala in 2002, the group enhances the intelligibility of the Scandinavian languages as well as the common legal traditions of the Nordic countries primarily by hosting biannual meetings. As the last meeting was in Oslo in 2018, the Stockholm meeting was originally planned to be held in 2020. Due to the pandemic, the conference was rescheduled several times until it eventually was organized this year not to conflict with other events.

Politicization of Private International Law (Opening Address)

Michael Hellner (Stockholm University)

Starting with references to von Savigny’s views on private international law in the mid 19th Century, Hellner remarked that von Savigny’s view on community and substitutability of civil law regimes within “Christian nations” is outdated in a modern context. Continuing with analogies to his own experiences from the work in the Hague Conference over the last 25 years, Hellner noted that whereas the discussions in the Hague used to be relatively small gatherings for academics from Europe and North America, they are now much more well-attended and influenced by politicians, which can be seen as a trend in the politicization of private international law. Concluding that politicization comes with increased public interest to private international law and that there are interactions between politics and law that make law more political but also make law more juridical.

Economic Sanctions in Private International Law

Yuliya Chernykh (University of Inland) and Marie Nesvik (Wikborg Rein)

Yuliya Chernykh began the economic sanctions session with a presentation titled “Between Facts and Law”. She noted that disputes on economic sanctions primarily seem to be settled in arbitral awards, but that those need to be enforced with support from national courts. Whereas the arbitral procedures tend to handle economic sanctions as facts making it impossible to perform, national courts may still find it impossible to enforce the arbitral awards with reference to public policy. Holding that the treating of sanctions as facts can be seen as a depoliticization and that the eternal evolvement of national public policy can be seen as politicization, Chernykh concluded that economic sanctions in private international law still is an evolving feature.

Marie Nesvik followed Chernykh’s presentation with practical remarks on the treatment of economic sanctions in commercial disputes. Focusing particularly on the practical situation with conflicting judgments and arbitral awards, Nesvik noted i.a. that Sweden traditionally has been viewed as a neutral arbitral seat, but that there now is an increasing interest for choosing “new” neutral jurisdictions as arbitral seats, e.g. Abu Dhabi and Istanbul.

The Politicization of Private International Family Law

Laima Vaige (Uppsala University)

Laima Vaige presented on the politicization of private international family law. She argued that private international family law often is framed as neutral but that it in fact is shaped by culture, politics, emotion, and ideology. In today’s world of intensifying affective politics, private international family law must consciously engage with these forces rather than pretend to be neutral. Drawing on recent Swedish legal developments in recognition of foreign marriages, international parenthood and legal gender recognition, Vaige showed how private international law operates with lingering “shadows” like lex forism and animosity to the foreign, despite its proclaimed democratic spirit.

Non-Recognition of Foreign Judgments

Johan Tufte Kristensen (University of Copenhagen)

Noting that Danish and Swedish private international law takes a very restrictive approach to foreign judgments, Tufte-Kristensen gave a historical background to the Danish ratio legis. The presentation showed how Denmark in the 1930’s adopted the restrictive approach to legal judgments that e.g. Sweden had had before. Back then, nationalist arguments that are again made popular motivated the legal shift by wanting to gain Danish business interests.  Tufte-Kristensen argued that the restrictive Danish approach to foreign judgments is out of sync with contemporary global trends based on comity and reciprocity.

The Relationship Between EU Law and Private International Law

Henrik Saugmandsgaard Øe (Gorrisen Federspiel)

The last presentation of the first day was made by the former advocate general Henrik Saugmandsgaard Øe. In his presentation, he examined how EU private international law is influenced and shaped by national legislation. Taking the characterization of the issue in Wikingerhof, C-59/19, EU:C:2020.950 as contractual or non-contractual as an example, Saugmandsgaard Øe made the point that the outcome of the case is influenced by French and Belgian procedural law that favours contractual obligations over tortious obligations. Further, he stressed the obligation of national courts to refer questions to the CJEU under Article 267 TFEU and the consequences of failing to do so. Through cases such as Achmea, C-284/16, EU:C:2018:158 and PL Holdings, C-109/20, EU:C:2021:875 Saugmandsgaard Øe showed that EU law restricts certain forms of arbitration between Member States to preserve legal coherence. Overall, he concluded that the autonomous interpretation of EU law limits private international law.

A round-table discussion where all of the presentations above were addressed concluded the first day of the conference.

Deficit of Social Values

Michael Bogdan (Lund University)

Noting that the politicization of law made by the communist regimes of eastern Europe in the 20th Century had difficulties in explaining a socialist rationale of private international law, Bogdan emphasised that private international law justice is something different from substantive law justice and that it is not necessarily as easy to dismantle. The speaker continued to analyse the traditional private international law value of having a law with a close relation to the facts applicable in contrast to a “better law approach”, where the law with the “best” substantial outcome is favoured.

International Climate Litigation

Jens Klinteskog (Uppsala University)

Jens Klinteskog presented on the politicization of private international law in relation to different climate procedures taking place in different jurisdictions all over the world. He argued that the trend with climate litigation politicizes private international law by reinforcing universalist ideals of shared global responsibility, challenging traditional notions of particularism and state sovereignty.

Young Researchers’ Session

After Klinteskog’s presentation a session with four shorter presentations by young, newly graduated lawyers took place. First, Klara Svensson presented her master thesis on custody decisions after foreign surrogacy arrangements under Article 16 of the 1996 Hague Convention. Second, Fredrik Lagergren presented his thesis on the reflexive effect of the Brussels I bis Regulation. Third, Mari Andersson presented a comparative approach to the treatment of foreign judgments in Sweden, the UK and Canada. Last in this session, Rikard Enskär presented on the role of private international law for ship collisions and maritime sabotage in the light of recent events occurring in the Baltic Sea.

Intangible Cultural Heritage over National Borders

Lydia Lundstedt (Stockholm University)

Lydia Lundstedt held the last presentation of the conference focusing on the protection of intangible cultural heritage. Taking off in the German-Italian Vitruvian Man case (for a blog post collecting links and explaining the relevance of the case, see here), Lundstedt compared the Italian protection mechanism to the equivalent mechanisms in Swedish and Danish law. Lundstedt questioned whether the protection mechanisms really could be considered subject to private international law.

Next NGPIL Conference and Anthology in English

During the last day the conference unanimously adhered to the proposal made by Peter Arnt Nielsen (Copenhagen Business School) to host the next NGPIL meeting in Copenhagen in mid-October 2027. The coming conference will mark the 25th anniversary of NGPIL.

Also, details on the volume of Scandinavian Studies in Law dedicated to the conference theme were announced on the last day. Scandinavian Studies in Law dates back to the 1950’s and is an initiative that aims to spread Nordic legal thinking to the English-speaking world. The coming volume will be the first in the series’ long history to be exclusively dedicated to private international law, even if several contributions in earlier volumes have dealt with the subject (for a list of private international law contributions in the series, see page 39 f. in this index). In addition to elaborated contributions of most of the conference speakers’ presentations, several other Nordic legal scholars in the field of private international law will contribute. The book is scheduled to be published in 2026.