The concept of habitual residence in selected sources of EU private international law and jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union: Functional approach versus strict textualism

Abstract

The concept of habitual residence is an important connecting factor in contemporary EU Private International Law (EU PIL). In this paper, the author examines this concept through content analysis and comparative analysis of selected sources of EU PIL and the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The author inevitably refers to the Regulations Rome I and Rome II, which provide a conceptual definition of habitual residence of legal and natural persons (in the context of performing economic activities). Unlike the sources of law pertaining to personal status, these Regulations did not leave the concept of habitual residence indefinite. The author underscores the importance of recitals from the acquis corpus. Being part of the preamble of the sources of EU law, they serve as basic guidelines for the Court of Justice when providing guidance to national courts on criteria for determining what is to be considered a habitual residence in different situations. The author further points out to the positions taken by the Court of Justice in its judgments in cases C-80/19 and C-289/20, regarding the possibility of disposing of multiple habitual residences, as well as the position taken in the judgment of 27 April 2016 in case C -528/14 on the question of whether a natural person can simultaneously have a habitual residence in an EU Member State and in a third country. In the final remarks, the author presents key considerations on the functional approach to this concept in view of ensuring an autonomous, uniform and consistent definition.