Perspectives Contentieuses Internationales: Issue 6 of 2026

The latest issue of the French journal dedicated to international dispute resolution, Perspectives Contentieuses internationales (PCI), has been released.

It is an open access publication and can be freely read here.

Concentration of Cross-Border Disputes (Part 1)

This new issue features the first part of a special dossier on the concentration of cross-border disputes edited by Sandrine Clavel (University of Paris-Saclay, UVSQ), Estelle Gallant (University of Toulouse Capitole) and Fabienne Jault-Seseke (University of Paris-Saclay, UVSQ). It consists of seven contributions that address the subject from various angles, ranging from general and strategic considerations to procedural issues and questions of family law and private enforcement.

Fabienne Jault-Seseke (University of Paris-Saclay, UVSQ), La concentration des contentieux transfrontières au service de la coherence

Consolidation of cross-border litigation makes it possible to satisfy the requirement of consistency. It is mainly understood as the ability to bring claims and defendants before a single judge, but it also arises in the context of res judicata. Consolidation serves the proper administration of justice by avoiding fragmented decisions in the same case, and it must be seen together with the right of access to a court. Finding the right balance is difficult. It depends on the nature and subject matter of the dispute. The rules that make such concentration possible are varied (related actions, the most appropriate forum, lis pendens, transfer of jurisdiction, specialization of courts, and cooperation between judges).

Sandrine Clavel (University of Paris-Saclay, UVSQ), Stratégie contentieuse globale et concentration des contentieux

Because the procedural strategies employed by the main parties in civil and commercial litigation — particularly corporations and NGOs — are primarily aimed at achieving the most favorable substantive outcome, the consolidation of litigation does not appear to be an objective per se. Furthermore, the fragmentation of litigation is a natural tendency in transnational disputes, due to the multiplicity of parties, the dispersion of the elements of the dispute across multiple legal systems, and the nature of the applicable legal rules. The overview of litigation strategies presented in this article therefore leads to the conclusion that what matters is not so much deciding, in abstracto, on the respective merits of consolidating or fragmenting international litigation — this point must be decided on a case-by-case basis by the parties involved, depending on the specific circumstances of their dispute — but rather to provide litigants with effective tools to achieve the goal of consolidating litigation when they deem it desirable, and to provide judges with effective tools to sanction any abuses that might be committed by these litigants in defining their litigation strategies.

Estelle Gallant (ed., University of Toulouse Capitole), A. Boiché (Avocat, Paris Court of Appeal), E. Fohrer-Dedeurwaerder (University of Toulouse Capitole) & S. Fulli-Lemaire (University Paris-Panthéon-Assas), La concentration du contentieux en matière familiale

Although the concentration of litigation in international family matters could undoubtedly be favored, it nevertheless appears that the European regulation of international family conflicts offers litigants a broad range of rules on judicial jurisdiction and thus establishes a deliberate form of forum shopping. This notably enables the better-informed parties to bring proceedings before the court whose applicable law will provide them with the greatest advantages. Mechanisms for consolidating proceedings do exist, but they clearly do not reflect any general objective pursued by the legislature.

The autonomy of the will, increasingly valued in private international family law, may therefore prove valuable for parties wishing to anticipate outcomes in the event of a dispute; however, it may also appear as a discriminatory tool serving only a certain category of litigants and thus fail to satisfy all the objectives of justice in private international law. Finally, the fragmentation of international litigation sometimes comes into conflict with national rules requiring the indivisibility of certain proceedings, raising the question of how such rules should be reconciled with European regulations.

Marie Nioche (University of Paris-Nanterre), Justice provisoire et concentration du contentieux transfrontière

Provisional justice tends to fragment proceedings in cross-border disputes. The analysis is based on the Brussels I bis Regulation. The author first addresses the causes of this fragmentation. She then considers possible solutions for improving the concentration of cross-border provisional litigation. Under current law, the options are limited, as traditional tools are ill-suited to provisional litigation. De lege ferenda, however, it is possible to effectively tackle fragmentation by recognizing the central role of the judge who has jurisdiction on the merits, both ex ante — to prevent coordination difficulties and conflicts of provisional proceedings or decisions — and ex post — to resolve them.

Philippine Blajan (University of Paris-Saclay, UVSQ), Concentrer le contentieux par l’utilisation optimale des clauses attributives de juridictions

Choice-of-court agreements have become key instruments for managing cross-border disputes in an increasingly complex international commercial environment. Beyond ensuring predictability, they enable parties to concentrate litigation before a single forum and reduce the risks of parallel proceedings and inconsistent judgments. Their effectiveness, however, depends on their ability to bind third parties involved in complex contractual networks and to withstand competing jurisdictional claims. At the same time, excessive concentration may undermine procedural fairness where vulnerable or weaker parties are compelled to litigate before a distant or burdensome forum. The article analyses the tensions between party autonomy, procedural efficiency, and access to justice under European and French private international law. It concludes by suggesting a new “jurisdictional concentration clause” designed to centralize disputes arising from interconnected contractual relationships while preserving fairness and legal certainty.

Julie Esquenazi (University of Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne) & Hélène Georgelin (Avocate à la Cour & University Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne), Clauses attributives de jurisdiction : la primauté à tout prix a un coût

In the last few months, case law has been particularly notable in relation to jurisdiction clauses. Notably, the scope of such clauses is becoming increasingly broader, particularly with regard to their primacy over other jurisdictional rules as well as their enforceability against interested third parties. This approach in case law, justified by the objective of predictability, may conflict with other principles, such as the proper administration of justice or the relative effect of agreements.

Laurence Idot (University Paris-Panthéon-Assas), Concentration des contentieux : les apports du public enforcement au private enforcement

Public enforcement in cross-border matters has developed considerably. Competition law is a prime testing ground. But financial and digital matters, among others, are also concerned. The mechanisms for consolidating litigation found there cannot simply be transposed to private enforcement. They are nevertheless a source of inspiration, whether in identifying the most suitable authority, putting in place cross-border information mechanisms, or identifying rules that help ensure coherence.

Other Articles

Caroline Derache (Avocate associée, FTPA) & Constance Plouchart (Avocate, FTPA), La loi applicable dans les contentieux en matière de transport aérien

Although international air transport is governed by uniform substantive rules laid down among others in long-standing international treaties, there are still many situations where, in case of litigation, the court may have to determine the law applicable to the claims brought before it. This is the case, for example, when parties other than the carrier are involved. Determining the relevant text and subsequently applying the appropriate conflict of laws rule can, then, give rise to debates that have led to decisions that are worth examining. However, some issues have not yet been resolved.

Sophie Duparc (University Paris-Panthéon-Assas), Elie Lenglard (University of Lille), Maud Minois (University of Paris Cité) & Noela Picari (University of Saarland), Quelle place pour la qualification lege fori à l’heure des qualifications autonomes ?

What role remains for lege fori characterization in a field of private international law that is now largely Europeanized and structured by the autonomous characterizations developed by the Court of Justice of the European Union? Using the Caraslanis judgment as a starting point, the authors argue that the distinction between national and autonomous characterization is less clear-cut than it appears. Although European integration has shifted the definition of connecting categories to the legal order of the European Union, it has neither eliminated the use of national legal concepts nor resolved the difficulties involved in identifying the subject matter of characterization. The study shows it through examples such as the French fiducie and the trust, direct actions, and claims based on the abrupt termination of established commercial relationships. Autonomous characterizations require a renewed comparative approach that takes national institutions into account, with the contemporary challenge being to reconcile these two methods rather than replace one with the other.

Shorter Pieces

Daniela de Avilez Demôro (International Arbitrator & GLAS) & Yannick Vincent (University of Lyon), Conference Report: Global Arbitration & Sustainability (GLAS) Forum 2026

Sandrine Clavel (University of Paris-Saclay, UVSQ), Premier pas vers une révision du règlement Bruxelles I bis

Fabienne Jault-Seseke (University of Paris-Saclay, UVSQ), La transposition de la directive anti-SLAPP