Paraguay: The New Paraguayan Law On International Contracts: Back To The Past?

Last Updated: 3 October 2016
Article by José Antonio Moreno Rodríguez

Professor Joachim Bonell's leadership has undisputedly been decisive for the remarkable developments which in recent decades have led to the gradual harmonization of contract law in the world. Deeply upset when, in 2008, Europe unsatisfactorily modified its conflict-of-laws rules for international contracting (signalling a resounding defeat for the harmonization crusaders in the continent), his unbendable spirit led him to affirm that hope is the last thing to be lost,1 and that the time was ripe to address and resolve this matter adequately on a global scale. Even though I have admired Professor Bonell for many years through his work, I only met him for the first time in The Hague in 2010, and from there on several times in the Netherlands and in Italy, where I became even more impressed with his wit, deep understanding of contract law and relentless determination to advance his beliefs on the subject. The work in The Hague was eventually concluded in 2015 and many of its accomplishments in favour of a less fragmented world in the field of international contracting can be traced back to Professor Bonell, whose principled guidance proved decisive for the fate of the endeavour and for the favourable outcome, which meant a step towards cosmopolitanism. Professor Bonell and many other missionaries (this is how the late Professor Allan Farnsworth described himself in promoting the virtues of universalism in contract law) may have lost the battle, but the defeat was merely pyrrhic: they are destined to win the war. This article, written in honour of the already legendary Professor Bonell, recounts the battle of the crusade, won in the country of Paraguay, together with the huge victory in The Hague.


Some years ago, French legal philosopher Michel Villey, complained that after the ancient Greeks and Romans, not much progress had been made effectively to grasp the notions of law and justice.2 In more "mundane" matters, not long ago Professor Friedrich Juenger of the University of California noted that the old Roman ius gentium and ius commune and the lex mercatoria of the Middle Ages, proved much more effective in private commercial relationships with foreign elements than the conflict-of-laws rules that spread across a multi-state world from the XIX century onwards.3

In 2015, Paraguay promulgated a brand-new law on international contracts. This Law can be qualified as a forward-looking piece of legislation, in line with recent proposals advanced by prestigious codifying organizations of the world and the Americas and taking into account current developments and the necessities of day-to-day commerce. Moreover, it may well pave the way for a return to the old cosmopolitan days, earlier aborted by the "balkanized" conception of an influential stream of "conflictualism" – leading to the application of national law to private international relationships.

In this contribution, its author will present and explain the new Paraguayan Law,4 focusing on its universal spirit – thus leaving behind years of chauvinism in the field of international contracting. The author is convinced that there has been nothing new under the sun since Cicero´s proclamation of the virtues of cosmopolitanism5 (when he stated that the day would come when the law was the same in Rome, in Athens and all around the world),6 and this should be particularly the case with Contract Law in a multi-State world.


The pendulum is indeed swinging again. We are moving back towards the universal spirit of the old Roman ius gentium and later, of the Middle and Modern Ages' ius commune and lex mercatoria. This was interrupted when the consolidation of modern States led to the nationalization of the law in the nineteenth century, which gave a tremendous boost to the discipline of Private International Law, understood as law intended to solve "conflicts of national laws".

Many factors are contributing to the swift changes of recent times.7 Inter alia, party autonomy is consolidating as a principle in international contracting. This leads to parties avoiding the unpredictable "conflictualism", via relevant provisions in their agreements or a clear choice of the legal regime that will govern them. Additionally, arbitration is consolidating as a widespread means for solving commercial disputes, providing the arbitrators with powerful tools to arrive to fair solutions in trans-border problems, beyond the mere automatic application of national laws in accordance with a conflict-of-laws mechanism.

On a theoretical level, the basis of this orthodox "conflictualism" suffered numerous attacks, and, in practice, it has been demonstrated that the system simply does not work when it comes to providing adequate responses to the necessities of transnational commercial activity.

International organizations have responded to the need to harmonize norms governing trans-border mercantile activities and thus, to leave behind an outdated "conflictualism" in this field.8 Remarkable efforts include those of the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT), created in 1926 under the auspices of the then League of Nations;9 the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), set up in 1966;10 and private organizations such as the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC),11 among others proposing uniform norms to govern several areas of international contracting.

Today, these various developments have had an impact on the interpretation of domestic laws, strongly influenced by comparative law.12 Thus, James Gordley speaks of a switch from a positivistic and nationalist approach to a transnational and functional interpretation,13 while Klaus Berger refers to an "internationally useful construction of domestic laws".14


In the aforementioned scenario, the last two decades have seen the inception of two conflictualist instruments with – regardless of their character – a powerful potential to leave behind the orthodoxy of nineteenth century "conflictualism": the Hague Principles on Choice of Law in International Commercial Contracts, approved in 2015, and the Inter-American Convention on the Law Applicable to International Contracts (Mexico Convention) of 1994.


The Hague Conference on Private International Law (hereinafter: the Hague Conference), undoubtedly the most prestigious organization in the world codifying conflict or choice-of-law rules,15 has embarked on drafting Principles on Choice of Law in International Commercial Contracts, now commonly referred to as "the Hague Principles", which it is envisaged will be very influential in the years to come.16

Qualified as "ground-breaking" for being the first legal instrument at a global level to address choice of law in international contracts, the Hague Principles are comprised of twelve Articles, including comments and some examples, all of which are preceded by an introduction and an explanation, intended to cut across the dividing line between common law and civil law, and to be used in both court and arbitration proceedings.

The origins of this idea can be traced back to 1980, inspired by the successful drafting of the so-called Rome Convention of 1980, now Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I), governing the law applicable to international contracts.17 These first glimmerings were abandoned after careful consideration of the difficulties of the drafting process and later of the difficulty of securing widespread ratification to make the document effective in the universal arena.

The project was resumed more than two decades later. Feasibility studies started in 2006, and in 2010 a Working Group was formed, comprised of fifteen members (two from Latin America: Lauro Gama and José A. Moreno Rodríguez) together with observers from UNIDROIT (Joachim Bonell), the ICC (Fabio Bortolotti), the ICC Commission of Arbitration (at the time represented by Francesca Mazza), UNCITRAL and the International Bar Association (IBA), among others. The Working Group was chaired by Daniel Girsberger, a renowned Private International Law Professor from Switzerland with broad expertise in arbitration, and diligently coordinated by Marta Pertegás of the Hague Conference Secretariat.

The Special Commission, (a diplomatic meeting with more than one hundred national delegations and observers) held in November 2012 - based on the propositions formulated by the Working Group - proposed a set of rules for the Hague Principles. In April 2013, the General Council Meeting of the Hague Conference, empowered to render final approval of the Principles, "welcomed the work" and "gave its preliminary endorsement" of the document. Likewise, the commentary to these rules received provisional endorsement at the General Council meeting of April 2014. Finally, in March 2015, the final version of the Hague Principles, with its comments and examples, gained formal approval.18

The Hague Principles follow the drafting technique of the UNIDROIT Principles.19 Hence, both instruments contain a preamble, rules or "principles", as well as comments and illustrations, where necessary. The Hague Conference was persuaded by the success of this drafting technique after considering the difficulties of attempting to draft a successful "hard law" international treaty. Like the UNIDROIT Principles, the Hague Principles are expected to guide legislators or contract drafters, and to serve for the purposes of interpretation both in a judicial and in an arbitral setting.

Indeed, we have before us two complementary instruments. Whereas the UNIDROIT Principles deal with substantive contract law issues such as – inter alia – formation, interpretation, content and termination, the Hague Principles address the problem of which law will apply to a contract: one – or several – national laws or even non-State law such as, for instance, the UNIDROIT Principles themselves.

Particular care was taken throughout the drafting process to take into account the developments in the arbitral world, since the Hague Principles are expected to provide useful guidance not only to judges but also to arbitrators in matters related to the complexities of party autonomy and its limits.

The Hague Principles do not deal with issues where choice-of-law is absent. It regulates party autonomy in international commercial settings, with provisions relating to formalities, severability, exclusion of renvoi, etc., including a ground-breaking rule in its Article 3 (with regards to judges as well as arbitrators) which admits the selection of non- State law. Public policy is also contemplated as an exceptional limit to party autonomy.

The instrument has an enormous potential thanks not only to the prestige of the Hague Conference and in view of the global reach sought, but also due to the fact that its ample admission of party autonomy endorses non-State law in a "conflictualist" text. Conditions are created, therefore, for a return to the cosmopolitan spirit of the old days, since parties can choose non-State law such as, for instance, the UNIDROIT Principles, and need not confine themselves to the dictates of the current orthodoxy of selecting State laws. Because of this, it may well be qualified as a Trojan Horse in favour of universalism in a choice-of-law text, with fecund potential consequences.

The Principles enjoy the legitimacy of having been advanced by an international organization that has been working with diverse stakeholders for many years. Additionally, one must account the simplicity of its dispositions and balanced regulation it includes on public policy, which contemplates the interest of commerce in expanding party autonomy and, at the same time, States' interest in exceptionally restricting choice-of-law when it is manifestly incompatible with the latter.


Non-State law is also admitted in the Inter-American Convention on the Law Applicable to International Contracts of 1994 (hereinafter: the Mexico Convention), advanced by the Organization of American States (OAS).20 This instrument draws upon the Rome Convention of 1980 on the subject, albeit expressly accepting, in contrast, the applicability of non-State law for the Americas21 — Professor Diego Fernández Arroyo´s article stating that "some roads lead beyond" being more than appropriate.22

The Mexico Convention comprises thirty Articles (like its European source) regarding scope, party autonomy, absence of choice and, as a novelty, the possibility of applying non-State law. The "Trojan" effect of this Convention emerges, furthermore, from an equitable formula included in the text that empowers adjudicators to assess transnational transactions in accordance with a universal criterion of justice rather than with a more limited view, subject to one or many national laws, as will be seen.

However, even though it was welcomed by relevant legal scholars,23 the Mexico Convention itself has so far only been ratified by Mexico and Venezuela, unlike other continental instruments which enjoy widespread reception. Speculation is rife as to why the Convention was not ratified by more countries, and while it is undeniable that some of its aspects may be subject to criticism, it defies common sense to attribute this poor reception to its openness to transnational law, considering all the aforementioned developments and other highly relevant accomplishments in this sense brought about by arbitration in the region – Unless, of course, the problem is that the legal establishment is not sufficiently aware of the consequences of these achievements, which would lead to the ratification of the Mexico Convention, fully in tune with these contemporary trends.

In fact, in a contribution written by the author of this article in collaboration with Mercedes Albornoz, it is stated that the current work of the Hague Conference should in part contribute to the concrete reception of the Mexico Convention —through the incorporation mechanism finally opted for— by a greater number of recipient countries.24

Finally, another reason which influenced the Convention's limited adoption, is ignorance of other modalities for its reception besides ratification. An alternative would be, for instance, simply copying its provisions into a national law on the matter,25 as has been done in Paraguay.

To read this article in full, please click here.


1 M. J. BONELL, El reglamento CE 593/2008 sobre la ley aplicable a las obligaciones contractuales ("Roma I") – Es decir, una ocasión perdida, in Cómo se Codifica hoy el Derecho Comercial Internacional. J. Basedow / D.P. Fernández Arroyo / J.A.Moreno Rodríguez (eds..), CEDEP y La Ley Paraguaya, 2010, p. 218.

2 M. VILLEY, Filosofía do Direito, São Paulo, Editorial Martins Fontes, 2003, p. 51 et seq. The text contained therein is a translation of work published in France in the mid-eighties of the twentieth century.

3 See, in particular: F.K. JUENGER, The Lex Mercatoria and Private International Law, Louisiana Law Review, p. 1133 et seq. In general, see the marvelous book: F. K. JUENGER, Choice of Law and Multistate Justice, New York, Transnational Publishers Inc., 2005.

4 See, both in Spanish and English, here:

5 As reiterated by R. GOODE, Reflections on the Harmonization of Commercial Law in, Commercial and Consumer Law, Chapter 1, R. Cranston / R. Goode (eds.), reproduced with minor changes in Uniform Law Review, 1991, p. 54 et seq.

6 See citation and the virtues of this in G. GILMORE, The Ages of American Law, New Haven and London, Yale University Press, 1977, p. 33. Berman speaks of an eventual new ius gentium. See in: H.J. BERMAN, Is Conflict of Laws Becoming Passé? A Historical Response, Emory University School of Law, Public Law & Legal Theory Research Paper Series, Research Paper No. 05-42,, p. 43.

7 I have addressed this topic in several previous works, such as, recently: J.A. MORENO, Los Contratos y La Haya: ¿Ancla al Pasado o Puente al Futuro?, in Contratación y Arbitraje, Contribuciones Recientes, CEDEP, Asunción, 2010, p. 5 et seq.

8 Bonell highlights as a characteristic of our times the multiple initiatives towards unification or at least harmonization of national laws (M.J. BONELL, International Uniform Law in Practice – Or Where the Real Trouble Begins, in The American Journal of Comparative Law, 38, 1990, p. 865 et seq.

9 See in:

10 See in:

11 See in:

12 The influence of comparative law in domestic laws is emphasized in K. ZWEIGERT / H. KÖTZ, An Introduction to Comparative Law, 3rd ed., New York, Oxford University Press Inc., 1998, p. 19. As stated by Zimmermann, we are living in an age of post-positivism. The narrowness, but also the security, of a national codification, or common law, is increasingly left behind and we are moving towards a new ius commune (R. ZIMMERMANN, Roman Law and the Privatization of Private Law in Europe, in Towards a European Civil Code, A. Hartkamp et al. (eds.), 2011, Kluwer, The Netherlands, p. 51; see also, in regard to German law: R. ZIMMERMANN, The German Civil Code and the Development of Private Law in Germany, in Oxford University Comparative Law Forum 1 in, 2006, after note 144. In France, even the "internists", albeit refusing to be labelled as comparatists, resort to comparison, whether consciously or not (B. FAUVARQUE-COSSON, Development of Comparative Law in France, in The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Law, Oxford / New York, Oxford University Press, 2006, p. 59. For developments in England, see: S. VOGENAUER, Sources of Law and Legal Method in Comparative Law, in The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Law, Oxford / New York, Oxford University Press, 2006, p. 876. In the United States, see: D.S. CLARK, Development of Comparative Law in the United States, in The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Law, Oxford / New York, Oxford University Press, 2006, p. 179.

13 J. GORDLEY, Is Comparative Law a Distinct Discipline? in 46 The American Journal of Comparative Law, 1998, p. 607.

14 See citation in the very interesting article by V. RUÍZ ABOU-NIGM, The Lex Mercatoria and Its Current Relevance in International Commercial Arbitration, in Revista DeCITA, Derecho del comercio internacional, temas y actualidades, Arbitraje, 02.2004, p. 111.

15 The Hague Conference is the oldest of the Hague international legal institutions (H. VAN LOON, The Hague Conference on Private International Law, in 2 The Hague Justice Journal, 2007, p. 4; in this article the former Secretary General of the organization describes its important work). 16 See, for instance, in L. RADICATI DI BROZOLO, Non-national rules and conflicts of laws: Reflections in light of the UNIDROIT and Hague Principles, in XLVIII Rivista di diritto internazionale privato e processuale, 2012/4, pp. 841-864.

17 See in: M. PERTEGÁS / I. RADIC, Elección de la ley aplicable a los contratos del comercio internacional. ¿Principios de La Haya?, in Cómo se Codifica hoy el Derecho Comercial Internacional, J. Basedow / D.P. Fernández Arroyo / J.A. Moreno Rodríguez (eds.), CEDEP y La Ley Paraguaya, 2010, p. 341 et seq.

18 The relevant documents can be accessed on the Hague Conference site at:

19 In fact, the Hague Principles reveal a drafting technique similar to the UNIDROIT Contract Principles of 1994, revised in 2004 and 2010, inspired in turn by the American Restatements, which purport to "re-state" the law in particular fields, and in the case of the former, modernize the law in areas where the current state of affairs is unsatisfactory (see H. KRONKE, Most Significant Relationship, Governmental Interests, Cultural Identity, Integration: 'Rules' at Will and the Case for Principles of Conflict of Laws, in IX Uniform Law Review, 2004/3, p. 473). This is also the spirit of the Hague Principles. They should not only reflect the status quo, but provide for desirable solutions for improving the state of affairs in international contracting in any areas where it is deemed necessary.

20 Since 1975, the OAS has been organizing its Specialized Conferences on Private International Law (CIDIP, for its Spanish acronym), which have generated 26 international instruments (including conventions, protocols, uniform documents and model laws), which shape the Inter-American Private Law framework. The first of these Conferences [CIDIP-I] was held in Panama City, Panama, in 1975. The most recent Conference [CIDIP-VI] was held at OAS headquarters in Washington, D.C., US, in 2002. The first half of [CIDIP-VII] took place on 7-9 October, 2009 where the Model Registry Regulations under the Model Inter-American Law on Secured Transactions was adopted ( An assessment of the CIDIP work can be found at D.P. FERNÁNDEZ ARROYO, Derecho Internacional Privado Interamericano, Evolución y Perspectivas, Santa Fé, Rubinzal, Culzoni Editores, 2000, p. 55 et seq.

21 Articles 9 and 10, which lead to an openness towards transnational law (see J.L. SIQUEIROS, Reseña General sobre la Quinta Conferencia Especializada Interamericana sobre el Derecho Internacional Privado, CIDIP-V, in Cursos de Derecho Internacional, Serie Temática, Volumen I (Parte I): El Derecho Internacional Privado en las Américas, 1974-2000, Secretaría General, Subsecretaría de Asuntos Jurídicos, Washington, D.C., 2002, p. 516. This matter is addressed again below.

22 This in a publication in French later translated into Spanish and published in Argentina (D.P. FERNÁNDEZ ARROYO, La Convención Interamericana sobre Derecho aplicable a los contraltos internacionales aprobada por a CIDIP-V, in Revista Jurisprudencia Argentina, Buenos Aires, nº 5933, 1995, pp. 820-824).

23 In fact, the modern solutions offered by the Mexico Convention have been applauded (see R. HERBERT, La Convención Interamericana sobre Derecho Aplicable a los Contratos Internacionales, RUDIP, Year 1-No. 1, p. 45; J. TÁLICE, La autonomía de la voluntad como principio de rango superior en el Derecho Internacional Privado Uruguayo, Liber Amicorum in Homenaje al Profesor Didier Opertti Badán, Montevideo, Editorial Fundación de Cultura Universitaria, 2005, pp. 560-561), stating that it deserves to be ratified or incorporated into the internal laws of the countries through other means.

24 J.A. MORENO RODRÍGUEZ / M.M. ALBORNOZ, Reflexiones emergentes de la Convención de México para la elaboración del futuro instrumento de La Haya en materia de contratación internacional, published in Spanish at In English: Reflections on the Mexico Convention in the Context of the Preparation of the Future Hague Instrument on International Contracts, in 7 Journal of Private International Law, Hart Publishing, 2011/3, p. 493.

25 This was the case of Venezuela (E. HERNÁNDEZ-BRETÓN, La Convención de México (CIDIP V, 1994) como modelo para la actualización de los sistemas nacionales de contratación internacional en América Latina, in DeCITA 9, Derecho del Comercio Internacional, Temas y Actualidades, Asunción, CEDEP, 2008, p. 170). On the Venezuelan Law, see T.B. DE MAEKELT / C. RESENDE / I. ESIS VILLAROEL, Ley de Derecho Internacional Privado Comentada, T. I y II, Caracas, Universidad Central de Venezuela, 2005. In particular, in Volume II, the work of J. OCHOA MUÑOZ / F. ROMERO, on the applicable law to international contracting and the lex mercatoria (pp. 739-832).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:
  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.
  • Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.
    If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here
    If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq you may opt out by clicking here

    Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

    Use of

    You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


    Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

    The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


    Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

    • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
    • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
    • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

    Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

    Information Collection and Use

    We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

    We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

    Mondaq News Alerts

    In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


    A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

    Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

    Log Files

    We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


    This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

    Surveys & Contests

    From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


    If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


    From time to time Mondaq may send you emails promoting Mondaq services including new services. You may opt out of receiving such emails by clicking below.

    *** If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of services offered by Mondaq you may opt out by clicking here .


    This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

    Correcting/Updating Personal Information

    If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

    Notification of Changes

    If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

    How to contact Mondaq

    You can contact us with comments or queries at

    If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.

    By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions