Does Proposed CESL Still Matter?

The aim of this essay is to study why proposed CESL was not adopted and how it plays a legislative role after its withdrawal. In December 2014, the EU Commission states that the proposed CESL would be modified 'to fully unleash the potential of e-commerce in the Digital Single market'. The Digital Single Market strategy which the president of the Commission Junker declares seems to profoundly influence the regimes of internal market transaction. In particular, contract laws involved in e-commerce are required to improve in terms of 'better access for consumers and businesses to online goods and services across the Europe', one of the three pillars of the strategy. An interesting point is that newly legislated proposals adopted legal methods which avoid controversial legal regimes that CESL has adopted. For example, both newly proposed Directives do not accept an optional regime where there have been serious debates. In spite of the official reason to withdraw - the Digital Single Market strategy, there have already been controversial and even critical issues around the proposed CESL. In this context, it is suggested that the issues recognised in the legislation review has partly influenced its withdrawal. Therefore, this essay will investigate three main reasons why the proposed CESL is abandoned; TFEU 114 as a legal base issue, issues regarding optional regime and its legal uncertainty issue. In fact, given that currently proposed Directives which partly cover the range of the proposed CESL have different approaches, it seems impossible for original form of the proposed CESL to revive. However, it does not mean that all accomplishments which have contributed to the proposal would be denied. On the contrary, considering not only legislative progress before and after the withdrawal but also provisions of current proposed Directives, the proposed CESL will play a pivotal role for future European contract law legislation.