This study addresses, from a perspective closely tied to extrajudicial legal practice, the development of the economic aspects of marriage in a cross-border context, characterized by the divergence of material and conflictual solutions, in light of the new rules of European private international law incorporated in Regulation (EU) 2016/1103 of 24 June 2016 implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of matrimonial property regimes.The analysis is approached from a problem oriented and functional perspective, with the purpose of emphasizing the key issues arising from the implementation of these rules. Special attention is given to the determination of applicable law and the practical implementation of the principle of individual autonomy in both substantive and conflictual aspects, exploring their extent and limitations, as well as the conventional mechanisms through which it is achieved. The study advocates for an interpretation that fosters the utmost degree of contractual freedom. Special emphasis is given to the crucial role of preventive implementation of private international law as a catalyst for fostering the exercise of individual autonomy. By doing so, it encourages the pursuit of tailored solutions that address the unique family dynamics, interests, and circumstances of the spouses. This approach facilitates the emergence of predictable and secure outcomes in anticipation of potential crises, aiming to minimize conflicts and disputes or enable their amicable resolution.On accounts of situations faced by legal operators, a thorough examination is undertaken, critically analysing a significant portion of the provisions of the Regulation and the alternative regulatory options it presents. This analysis specifically emphasises the tension or contrast arising from the juxtaposition of the universal nature of applicable law and the jurisdictional territoriality, as well as the noticeable absence of a more robust harmonizing framework. This becomes particularly apparent through the segmented response dictated by the European private international law to family economy, contrasting with the aspiration for transnational recognition of the unified identity of matrimonial status. The drift caused by the reliance on the indirect referral method to resolve interterritorial conflicts in multilegislative states like ours, which operate under outdated conflict-of-law principles that differ from those prevailing in Europe, is also a sign of lack of harmonization. Ultimately, this study refers to the jurisdictional competence and the role that private autonomy plays in its determination. This is followed by a the analysis of the interplay among the UE Regulations governing family matters in relation to applicable law and competent jurisdiction.
