Mesure d'exécution forcée - Titre exécutoire
Avocat
The Organization of American States (OAS) is organizing a virtual forum as noted in the poster above. It will take place on Monday 24 May 2021 at 11 am (Washington USA time). For more information, click here.
This event will be held in Spanish only and is free of charge. The event will also be streamed live via social media networks.
This event follows an important and recent milestone of the OAS in which the Inter-American Juridical Committee completed its 98th Regular Session approving the Principles on Privacy and Protection of Personal Data and Supporting the Hague Principles on the Choice of Law Applicable to International Commercial Contracts. Click here for the specific resolution (9 April 2021) and here for general information.
In February 2019, the Inter-American Juridical Committee adopted the “Guide on the Law Applicable to International Commercial Contracts in the Americas.”
From 9 to 11 September 2021, the Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law will host a conference titled The Private Side of Transforming our World – UN Sustainable Development Goals 2030 and the Role of Private International Law. Depending on the course of the pandemic, the organizers plan that the conference will take place either at the Max Planck Institute in Hamburg virtually or in a hybrid form. An official invitation was issued and registration is now open.
The conference is designed to present findings of the research project bearing the same title led by Ralf Michaels (Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law), Verónica Ruiz Abou-Nigm (University of Edinburgh) and Hans van Loon (former Secretary General of the Hague Conference on Private International Law). The project, as explained by its leaders, “aims to raise an awareness of how PIL – with its methods and institutions – is also capable of making a significant contribution in the quest for sustainable development” defined in UN Sustainable Development Goals 2030. The edited volume presenting findings of the project will be published by Intersentia and is scheduled to be released in September 2021, to be ready for the conference. The volume will be freely accessible online, in open access.
The following 19 contributors involved in the project will present and discuss their findings on respective SDGs (the exact conference program will be ready in the coming weeks):
SDG 1 No PovertyBenyam Dawit Mezmur (University of the Western Cape, South Africa)
SDG 2 Zero HungerJeannette Tramhel (Organization of American States, United States of America)
SDG 3 Good Health and Well-beingAnabela Susana de Sousa Gonçalves (Universidade do Minho, Portugal)
SDG 4 Quality EducationKlaus Beiter (North-West University, South Africa)
SDG 5 Gender EqualityGülüm Özçelik (Bilkent Üniversitesi, Turkey)
SDG 6 Clean Water and SanitationRichard Frimpong Oppong (Kamloops, Canada)
SDG 7 Affordable and Clean EnergyNikitas E. Hatzimihail (University of Cyprus, Cyprus)
SDG 8 Decent Work and Economic GrowthUlla Liukkunen (University of Helsinki, Finland)
SDG 9 Industry, Innovation and InfrastructureVivienne Bath (University of Sydney, Australia)
SDG 10 Reduced InequalityThalia Kruger (Universiteit Antwerp, Belgium)
SDG 11 Sustainable Cities and CommunitiesKlaas Hendrik Eller (Universiteit van Amsterdam, Netherlands)
SDG 12 Responsible Consumption and ProductionGeneviève Saumier (McGill University, Canada)
SDG 13 Climate ActionEduardo Álvarez-Armas (Brunel University London, United Kingdom and Université Catholique de Louvain, Belgium)
SDG 14 Life Below WaterTajudeen Sanni (Kampala International University, Uganda)
SDG 15 Life on LandDrossos Stamboulakis (Monash University, Australia)
Jay Sanderson (University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia)
Sabine Corneloup (Université Panthéon-Assas, Paris II, France)
Jinske Verhellen (Universiteit Gent, Belgium)
Fabricio Polido (Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Brazil)
La CJUE clarifie la portée du principe ne bis in idem applicable, affirmant le caractère facultatif de ce motif de non-exécution tout en précisant, dans ce contexte, la portée des notions de « mêmes faits » et des conditions relatives à l’exécution de la condamnation.
Eu égard à la marge nationale d’appréciation, le Luxembourg pouvait, sans enfreindre la Convention, condamner un lanceur d’alerte à 1 000 € d’amende pour avoir révélé des informations attentatoires à la réputation de son employeur au motif que les documents divulgués n’avaient apporté aucune information essentielle, nouvelle et inconnue jusqu’alors.
Séparation des pouvoirs
Protection des consommateurs
Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer