Feed aggregator

First update of the information referring to Article 76 of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, to be found here (OJ C 390/10, 24.11.2015).

The French Cour de Cassation’s in Banque Privee Edmond de Rothschild Europe v X held that a unilateral jurisdiction clause was invalid under (doubtful) reference to (then) Article 23 of the Brussels I Regulation. The clause was held not to be binding under the French doctrine of clauses potestatives, even though the agreed forum was Luxembourg (whence the validity of the clause was judged under the lex fori derogati, not prorogati; that will no longer be possible under the recast Jurisdiction Regulation). In Credit Suisse, it extended this view (without reference this time to clauses potestatives) to choice of court in the context of the Lugano Convention.

In Apple Sales international v eBizcuss.com, the Cour de Cassation effectively qualifies its Rotschild case-law. The Court of Appeal held as unacceptable, under the theory of clauses potestatives, choice of court obliging eBizcuss to sue in Ireland, while allowing Apple Sales International to sue either in Ireland, or the place of registered office of eBizcuss, or any place where Apple Sales would have suffered damage. The Cour de Cassation now held that this clause is perfectly acceptable under Article 23 (now 25)’s regime for it corresponds to the need of foreseeability. (Which more extreme unilateral clauses arguably do not have). As always, the judgment is scant on details of the underlying contract whence it is not entirely clear whether French law was lex contractus or whether the Cour stuck to lex fori as determining validity of choice of court.

Geert.

La CEDH a condamné la Russie qui a refusé à une retraitée le bénéfice d’une assistance juridique gratuite dans le cadre d’une procédure pour une infraction qualifiée d’ « administrative ».

en lire plus

La directive du 25 octobre 2012 (dir. 2012/29/UE) destinée à renforcer et regrouper les droits des victimes de la criminalité par la création de normes minimales européennes est applicable depuis le 16 novembre 2015 dans l’ensemble des États membres conformément à sa date limite de transposition. 

en lire plus

« Les requêtes aux fins de certification des titres exécutoires français, en vue de leur reconnaissance et de leur exécution à l’étranger, en application de l’article 41 du règlement (CE) n° 2201/2003 du Conseil du 27 novembre 2003, sont présentées au juge qui a rendu la décision ».

en lire plus

The 10th edition of the International Seminar on Private International Law, organized by Prof. Fernández Rozas and Prof. de Miguel Asensio will be held next 14 and 15 April 2016, at the Faculty of Law of the Universidad Complutense of Madrid .

At the sitting of Thursday 14 special attention will be paid to the recent reforms of Spanish private international law; the latest developments towards codification of private international law in Latin America will also be addressed . The following sessions, on Friday, will focus on the development of private international law in Europe and within international commercial arbitration.

As in previous editions the main lectures of the seminar will be in charge of well-known scholars, including Jürgen Basedow (Max Planck Institute Hamburg), Roberto Baratta (University of Macerata), Bertrand Ancel (Paris II), Christian Heinze (University of  Hannover) and Sebastien Mancieaux (University of Dijon). Nonetheless, the seminar is open to all scholars, either Spanish or foreigners, willing to participate with brief presentations. In this regard proposals including both the title and a brief summary are to be sent no later than December 15 to Prof. Angel Espiniella Menéndez (espiniell@gmail.com). The final written version of the presentations, not exceeding 25 pages, is to be submitted before April 1, 2016. Subject to prior peer-review they will be published in the Anuario Español de Derecho Internacional Privado, vol. XVI.

The registration deadline to attend the seminar, as well as the programme and further information will be announced in due time.

Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel d'Aix-en-Provence, 5e chambre, 14 avril 2015

Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel d'Amiens, chambre de l'instruction, 16 octobre 2015

Less is sometimes more so I shall not attempt to summarise all issues in Case C-198/14 Valev Visnapuu. The case makes for sometimes condensed reading however it perfectly illustrates the way to go about dealing with obstacles to trade put in place for environmental, public health or, as in this case, both reasons.

Mr Visnapuu essentially forum shops Estonia’s lower prices on alcohol by offering Finnish clients home delivery of alcoholic beverages purchased there. No declaration of import is made to Finish customs and excise, thereby circumventing (accusation of course is that this is illegal) a variety of excise duties imposed for public health and environmental reasons, as well as a number of requirements relating to retail licenses and container requirements (essentially a deposit-return system) for beverages.

Confronted with a demand to settle various tax debts, as well as with a suspended prison sentence, Mr Visnapuu turns to EU law as his defence in a criminal proceeding. The CJEU then had to settle a variety of classic trade and environment /public health questions: whether the packaging and packaging waste Directive is exhaustive on the issue of deposit-return system (answer: no and hence the system additionally needs to be assessed vis-a-vis EU primary law: Article 34 ff TFEU or Article 110 TFEU); whether in the context of that Directive excise duties on packaging may be imposed (yes) and packaging integrated into a functioning return system exempt (yes; in the absence of indications that imported systems are less likely to enjoy the exemption); whether the relevant excise duties fall under Article 34 ff TFEU or Article 110 TFEU (answer: it is part of an internal system of taxation hence needs to be judged vis-a-vis Article 110 TFEU); and finally whether the retail licence requirement needs to be judged viz Article 34 or Article 37 TFEU (answer: mixed, given the various requirements at stake). Final judgment on proportionality is down to the Finnish courts.

Readers in need of a tipple would be advised to postpone until after reading the judgment. Again though the case shows that if one keeps a clear head, classic structures of applying EU law go a long way in untangling even complex matters of law and fact.

Geert.

Il nuovo diritto di famiglia – Profili sostanziali, processuali e notarili, vol. IV – Tematiche di interesse notarile – Profili internazionalprivatistici, a cura di Alessandra Cagnazzo, Filippo Preite e Vera Tagliaferri, Giuffrè, 2015, ISBN 9788814201134, pp. 1360, Euro 150.

Tra i contributi di argomento internazionalprivatistico si segnalano: La legge italiana di diritto internazionale privato e le convenzioni internazionali, di Alessandra Zanobetti; Qualificazione e istituti del diritto di famiglia sconosciuti, di Stefano Armellini; La legge applicabile al divorzio nel regolamento c.d. “Roma III”, di Ilaria Viarengo; Il regolamento 2201/2003: circolazione delle sentenze in materia di separazione, divorzio e annullamento del matrimonio, di Ilaria Queirolo; La legge applicabile ai fini della determinazione dello status familiare nella disciplina del ricongiungimento, di Olivia Lopes Pegna; La circolazione delle sentenze ecclesiastiche di nullità del matrimonio, di Alessandra Lanciotti; Il riconoscimento del divorzio notarile, di Maria Caterina Baruffi; Giurisdizione in materia di responsabilità genitoriale: il regolamento n. 2201/2003, di Laura Carpaneto; La convenzione dell’Aja del 1996 sulla protezione dei bambini, di Laura Carpaneto; La libera circolazione delle decisioni in materia di responsabilità genitoriale nel regolamento n. 2201/2003, e Giurisdizione, legge regolatrice, riconoscimento ed esecuzione delle decisioni in materia di obbligazioni alimentari, di Margherita Salvadori; Le proposte di regolamenti dedicate ai regimi patrimoniali tra coniugi e partner in unioni registrate, di Elisabetta Bergamini; La cittadinanza multipla dei minori e diritto al nome, di Emilia Maria Magrone; Il riconoscimento dei provvedimenti di adozione stranieri, di Chiara Tuo; Il riconoscimento dei patti successori tra i coniugi, di Giovanna Debernardi; La sottrazione internazionale di minori, di Luciana Sangiovanni.

Per maggiori informazioni si veda qui.

Le Tribunal de l’Union a, dans un arrêt du 10 novembre 2015, pour la première fois depuis l’entrée en vigueur au 1er juillet 2015 de son nouveau règlement de procédure, statué selon une procédure accélérée.

en lire plus

SIDIBlog – the blog of the Italian Society of International Law and European Union Law – has issued a call for contributions to an on-line debate on EU Regulation No 848/2015 on insolvency proceedings (recast).

[From the blog] – The EU Regulation No 848/2015 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 brings about the revision of the EC Regulation No 1346/2000 in matters of insolvency proceedings: while not departing from the structure of the pre-existing Regulation, the new instrument aims at improving the application of uniform rules under several aspects. With the following post of Professor Stefania Bariatti, and other ones that will be published in the coming weeks, the SIDIBlog intends to start a debate on the novelties contained in the new Insolvency Regulation, trusting to host further contributions of Italian and foreign scholars and practitioners, willing to discuss the issues raised by the new instrument. Prospective contributors can submit their posts at sidiblog2013@gmail.com.

Contributions may be submitted in English, French, Spanish or Italian. The papers received will appear in the next issue of the on-line journal Quaderni di SIDIBlog.

Trevor C. Hartley, Anti-suit Injunctions in Support of Arbitration: West Tankers Still Afloat, in International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 2015, p. 965 ss.

[Abstract] – In its eagerly awaited judgment in Gazprom, the CJEU declined to follow the Opinion of Advocate General Wathelet that West Tankers is no longer good law. The West Tankers case decided that the courts of one Member State are precluded from granting antisuit injunctions directed at proceedings in the courts of another Member State, even if the proceedings in which the injunction is granted fall outside the scope of the Brussels Regulation by reason of the fact that they are concerned with arbitration. The Gazprom case confirms that West Tankers is still good law.

Ulteriori informazioni sul fascicolo 4/2015 della rivista sono disponibili qui.

SIDIBlog – the blog of the Italian Society of International Law and European Union Law – has issued a call for contributions to an on-line debate on EU Regulation No 848/2015 on insolvency proceedings (recast).

[From the blog] – The EU Regulation No 848/2015 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 brings about the revision of the EC Regulation No 1346/2000 in matters of insolvency proceedings: while not departing from the structure of the pre-existing Regulation, the new instrument aims at improving the application of uniform rules under several aspects. With the following post of Professor Stefania Bariatti, and other ones that will be published in the coming weeks, the SIDIBlog intends to start a debate on the novelties contained in the new Insolvency Regulation, trusting to host further contributions of Italian and foreign scholars and practitioners, willing to discuss the issues raised by the new instrument. Prospective contributors can submit their posts at sidiblog2013@gmail.com.

Contributions may be submitted in English, French, Spanish or Italian. The papers received will appear in the next issue of the on-line journal Quaderni di SIDIBlog.