Abstract
Internet penetration has created a revolutionary change in people's communication nowadays. By creating immaterial and elusive cyberspace, without borders and limits of communication a three-dimensional territorial concept has been transformed by globalizing social relations and reducing importance of regional or national dimensions. All situations taking place on the Internet also occur somewhere in the reality. Sometimes it is difficult to measure whether the events are random or unrelated to particular events. Technological progress offers new possibilities to change a user's real location either consciously or subconsciously. However, the law is highly territorial in nature. This article focuses on existing conflict of law rules under the EU law and reveals its weaknesses in relation to non-contractual obligations caused by the Internet. Therefore, the author observes core concepts of the applicable law by analyzing the legal notions and information technology concepts and assessing the suitability of regulation in cyberspace. The EU regulation, the doctrine of European and domestic authors as well as the EU case law have been examined. As a result, a number of conclusions have been drawn on the suitability of non-contractual relationships in cyberspace considering Rome II Regulation.
Highlights
By creating immaterial and elusive cyberspace, without borders and limits of communication a three-dimensional territorial concept has been transformed by globalizing social relations and reducing importance of regional or national dimensions
This article focuses on existing conflict of law rules under the EU law and reveals its weaknesses in relation to non-contractual obligations caused by the Internet
Internet penetration has created a revolutionary change in human communication
Summary
Internet penetration has created a revolutionary change in human communication. In situations where the parties have not made such a choice, pursuant to Article 4 of the Rome II Regulation, the law applicable to a non-contractual obligations arising out of a tort or delict shall be the law of the country in which the damage occurs irrespective of the country in which the event giving rise to the damage occurred and irrespective of the country or countries in which the indirect consequences of that event occur It means that the regulation prefers the law of the country of the immediate damage (lex loci damni) to the law of the country of the harmful act, probably because it pays more attention to compensating the victim than to influencing the behaviour of wrongdoer. Combining the provisions of Rome II Regulation and the Brussels I Regulation if the victim decides to bring the action in the country where a part of damages has arisen, the court will have jurisdiction regarding that part of
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
