Gli accordi di scelta del foro nel diritto internazionale privato: una ricostruzione alla luce della recente prassi

This article analyses the institution of jurisdiction agreements in private international law, focusing, first, on the persistent uncertainties surrounding their legal nature. In particular, the analysis will begin with a comparison between the substantive approach, typical of common law systems, and the procedural approach, characteristic of civil law jurisdictions. In light of the limitations inherent in both theories, the contribution will advocate the mixed-nature thesis of jurisdiction agreements, which is considered more suitable for capturing the dual, substantive and procedural, dimension of choice of court clauses. Subsequently, attention will be devoted to exclusive choice of court agreements, currently governed by art. 25 of Regulation (EU) n. 1215/2012 and art. 3 of the 2005 Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements. Specifically, by adopting a restrictive interpre tation of the aforementioned provisions, the contribution aims to define more precisely the notion of exclusivity, excluding from the category of exclusive jurisdiction agreements those clauses that depart from the model established by the above-mentioned instruments of uniform private interna tional law. Moreover, this reconstruction will shed light on the category of asymmetric jurisdiction clauses, reserving this qualification exclusively for so-called unilateral agreements, namely agree ments that are “exclusive” for one party and “non-exclusive” for the other.