Apparent conflicts in the characterisation of cross-border transfers of rights «in rem» and concealed substantive connecting factors for jurisdiction over immovable assets

SUMMARY: I. INTRODUCTION.— II. THE PROCESSES OF CHARACTERISATION (QUALIFICATION) IN PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW: 1. Traditional and contemporary connecting factors for rights in rem; 2. «Characterisation» in the concrete subsumption process or in the development of new legal rules?: 2.1. The process of characterisation between the two characterisation processes in historical dimension; 2.2. The importance of the conceptual distinction for the interpretation of Article 24(1) of the Brussels I bis Regulation.— III. CROSS-BORDER TRANSFERS OF RIGHTS IN REM AS A MATTER OF CONTRACT: 1. The undisputed contractual character of cross-border transfers of rights in rem; 2. Avoidance actions of cross-border transfer of rights in rem as a matter of contract: 2.1. The rationale of the exclusive character of the forum rei sitae in Reichert; 2.2. Good faith as a connecting factor in Feniks compared to the Italian case Corkran; 2.3. The principle of effectiveness in Reitbauer and Schmidt.— IV. NON-CONTRACTUAL TRANSFERS OF RIGHTS IN REM FALLING WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE RULE ON RIGHTS IN REM: 1. The scope of the jurisdictional rule on rights in rem; 2 Examples of causes of action falling within the scope of Article 24(1) EU Regulation 1215/2012: 2.1. Subrogation in actions for damages; 2.2. The Right of preemption; 2.3. Common property; 3. Vis attractiva of the forum rei sitae in litigation on modification of inscriptions in national land registers— V. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The characterisation of cross-border transfers of rights in rem; 2. The use of good faith and effectiveness as connecting factors for avoidance actions.