1. In this article, I use “private international law” rather than “conflict of laws” or “choice of law” for two reasons. First, this is in accordance with European usage. Second, it brings out the focus on private interest that characterises the country of origin principle better than “conflict of laws” or “choice of law”, both of which suggest that the relevant question goes to which of several laws is applicable.
2. Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on services in the internal market (by the Commission), 5 March 2004, COM(2004) 2 final/3, Art 16, “Country of origin principle”:
3. Member States shall ensure that providers are subject only to the national provisions of their Member State of origin which fall within the coordinated field. Paragraph 1 shall cover national provisions relating to access to and the exercise of a service activity, in particular those requirements governing the behaviour of the provider, the quality or content of the service, advertising, contracts and the provider's liability.
4. The Member State of origin shall be responsible for supervising the provider and the services provided by him, including services provided by him in another Member State.
5. Member States may not, for reasons falling within the coordinated field, restrict the freedom to provide services in the case of a provider established in another Member State, in particular, by imposing any of the following requirements: