Feed aggregator

K et A
Espace de liberté, sécurité et justice
Les États membres peuvent exiger que les ressortissants de pays tiers réussissent un examen d’intégration civique préalablement au regroupement familial

Commission / France
Aide d'État
La France a manqué à ses obligations en s’abstenant de récupérer l’aide de 220 millions d’euros accordée à la SNCM au titre de certains services de transport maritime assurés entre Marseille et la Corse

Enquête préliminaire ; Criminalité organisée

Vente immobilière

Call for Papers on Private International Law, Economics, and Development

The Federalist Society’s Faculty Division is pleased to announce a Call for Papers on Private International Law, Economics, and Development.  Up to four submissions will be selected for inclusion in an upcoming Faculty Division colloquium on this topic.  Authors of the selected pieces will each receive a prize of approximately $2,500 (any co-authors must share a single prize).  The topic is intentionally broad in scope, though we have a particular interest in papers that offer fresh perspectives or insights on the relationship between private international law, economics, and development.

The Private International Law, Economics, and Development colloquium is intended to engage private international law from a legal, economics, and public policy perspective—particularly the seeming lack of international agreement on how trade should be encouraged and regulated. Some contend legal regimes that promote free trade will benefit all of society, while others argue that such an approach benefits the relatively wealthy at the expense of the relatively poor. Fitted within this larger debate of politics and economics is the important question of what role, if any, private international law should play in promoting and regulating transnational activity.  Winning submissions will be incorporated into a special colloquium session, during which we hope to engage some of the latest thinking on these issues.

The winning authors will be expected to attend the colloquium (Oct. 9-10, 2015), which we plan to hold in the Los Angeles area, but not to present their papers in the formal sense; rather, all participants will have read the papers beforehand and will come prepared to engage in a freewheeling discussion on the issues the papers raise.  Submissions will be accepted from current law faculty or those pursuing full-time employment in the legal academy.

There is a limit of one submission per person.

Submissions must be substantially complete and formatted in accord with the Bluebook.  Submissions should be of a quality publishable in a mainstream law journal, but must not have been published as of the date of the submission deadline below.  This must be the case even if the paper has been accepted for publication in a journal or law review.

Submissions must be sent via Microsoft Word or pdf attachment to anthony.deardurff@fed-soc.org no later than 5:00pm Eastern Time on Friday July 31, 2015.

 

Guest Post by Professor Marketa Trimble (UNLV) (also posted at this blog). 

Imagine that someone had a patent on the internet and only those who had a license from the patent holder could, for example, do business on the internet. This internet patent would not need to concern the internet protocol, the domain name system, or any other technical features of the network; the patent could, in fact, cover something else – a technology that everyone, or almost everyone, who wants to do business on the internet needs, a technology that is not, however, a technical standard. There might be one such patent application – the patent application discussed below – that could be approaching this scenario.

We must accept, however reluctantly, that activities on the internet will not be governed by a single internet-specific legal regime or by the legal regime of a single country. Although countries might agree on an internet-specific regime for the technical features of the internet, and might even adopt some uniform laws, countries want to maintain some of their country-specific national laws. People and nations around the world are different, and they will always have diverse views on a variety of matters – for example, online gambling. Online gambling might be completely acceptable in some countries, completely unacceptable in others, or somewhere in between; likewise, countries have different understandings of privacy and requirements for the protection of personal data. Therefore, countries now have and likely always will have different national laws on online gambling and different national laws on privacy and personal data protection. Compliance with multiple countries’ laws regarding the internet is nonnegotiable, certainly for those private parties who wish to conduct their activities on the internet transnationally and legally. Nevertheless, in practice and for some matters, the number of countries whose laws are likely to be raised against an actor on the internet may be limited, as I discussed recently.

For some time the major excuse for noncompliance with the laws of multiple countries on the internet was the ubiquitousness of the network. The network’s technical characteristics seemed to make it impossible for actors to both limit their activity on the internet territorially, and also to identify with a sufficient degree of reliability the location of parties and events on the internet, such as customers and their place of consumption. However, as geolocation and geoblocking tools developed, location identification and territorial limitation of access became feasible. Of course the increase in the use of geolocation tools generated more interest in the evasion of geolocation, and increased evasion has prompted even further improvements of the tools. The argument that we cannot limit or target our activity territorially because we don’t know where our content is accessed or consumed no longer seems valid. (Also – at least in some countries – courts and agencies have permitted internet actors to employ low-tech solutions as sufficient territorial barriers, for example, disclaimers and specific language versions.)

The multiplicity of applicable laws that originate in different countries and apply to activities on the internet is more troubling in some areas of law than in others. One area of law that permeates most internet activity is data privacy and personal data protection. Any internet actor who has customers and users (and therefore probably has user and traffic analytics) will likely encounter national data protection laws, which vary country-by-country (even in the EU countries, which have harmonized their personal data protection laws, national implementing regulations may impose country-specific obligations). Therefore, compliance with the varying national data protection laws will become one of the essential components of conducting business and other activities transnationally. If someone could patent a method for complying simultaneously with multiple countries’ data privacy laws on the internet and claim the method broadly enough to cover all possible methods of achieving compliance with the national privacy laws, that patent owner might just as well own a patent on the internet, or at least on a very large percentage of internet activity.

A U.S. patent application that seeks a patent on simultaneous compliance with multiple countries’ data privacy laws on the internet through broad method claims is application No. 14/266,525, which concerns “Systems and Methods of Automated Compliance with Data Privacy Laws,” meaning “laws of varying jurisdictions” (the title and the “Abstract”). The invention is designed to facilitate an automatic method of complying with the data privacy laws of various jurisdictions, which are, as the “Introduction” notes, “complicated, diverse, and jurisdiction specific.” The method envisions that once “person-related data” are requested from a data provider, a “filter is the [sic] automatically applied to the person-related data to restrict transfer of person-related data [that] does [sic] not meet the data privacy regulations applicable to the jurisdiction” (the “Introduction”); the filter also checks for any consents by the data subject if the particular regulations require them. The method also foresees, for example, the possibility of “identif[ying] different origins of the person-related data sources” in terms of their geographical location (“Trust Object and Trust Data”).

The patent application still must be prosecuted, and the – undeniably useful – invention will be subject to scrutiny as to its compliance with the requirements of statutory subject matter, novelty, and non-obviousness. A patent on the application may not issue at all, or the language of the application may be amended and the claims narrowed. Whatever the future might bring for the claimed invention, this patent application serves as a useful prompt for thinking about the components that have been or are becoming essential to conducting business and other activities on the internet.

Travel is a wonderful opportunity to catch up on reading back issues of The Economist. Now I have made a valiant effort in recent years to reduce the pile. I am now only a few months behind. (I read the magazine diagonally when it comes out. Properly a little later). In the issue of 28 February of this year, there is a report on the town of Windsor, New York, along with 14 other towns along New York’s border with Pennsylvania, wanting to secede and join Penn. I have not been able to get an update on the state of affairs, and I am not sure whether the idea got much traction.

It is the ultimate answer to regulatory competition: to move an entire slice of territory into what is perceived as a preferable regulatory regime. The cause? New York’s strict (some might say: cautious) policy on fracking /shale gas. Penn State is fracking friendly. New York has banned it.

The Economist also flag that State secession in the US has only ever succeeded in 1777: when a chunk of New York became Vermont. Now, that’s a State where others pack and move to in upwards harmonisation fashion: for Vermont is arguably the top of the regulatory curve when it comes to environment and food regulation.

Geert.

Federcoopesca e.a. / Commission
Agriculture
Des associations de pêcheurs italiens ne peuvent pas contester devant le Tribunal de l’UE un plan d’action prévoyant des mesures nationales dans le domaine, notamment, de la pêche à l’espadon

Le refus de transcrire, à l’état civil français, l’acte de naissance étranger d’un enfant né à l’étranger des suites d’une gestation pour autrui et ayant un parent français ne peut plus être justifié par la seule existence de la convention de GPA dès lors que l’acte de naissance litigieux mentionne en qualité de père et mère les véritables parents biologiques de l’enfant.

En carrousel matière:  Oui

en lire plus

L’annata 2015 del Japanese Yearbook of International Law raccoglie, fra gli altri, alcuni contributi relativi alla Convenzione dell’Aja del 1980 sugli aspetti civili della sottrazione internazionale di minori (ratificata dal Giappone nel 2014).

Tra questi: Introductory Note: Japan’s Conclusion of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspect of International Child Abduction (Tatsuki Nishioka, Takako Tsujisaka); International Child Abduction Cases and the Act for the Implementation of the Hague Convention — Impact on Domestic Cases and Family Law — (Masayuki Tanamura); Case Proceedings for the Return of an Abducted Child and the Compulsory Execution in Japan (Masako Murakami); The 1980 Hague Convention and Mediation — A German Perspective — (Martina Erb-Klünemann); Return Orders under the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction — The Issues Facing the Japanese courts — (Nigel Vaughan Lowe).

Ulteriori informazioni sul fascicolo sono qui disponibili.

Les États membres sont tenus, dans le cadre du service universel de communications électroniques, de fournir des services d’abonnement internet nécessitant un raccordement à internet en position déterminée ; les services de communications mobiles, quels qu’ils soient, en sont exclus. 

En carrousel matière:  Oui

en lire plus

On 3 and 4 December 2015, the University of Bologna will host a conference on the topic The EU as a forum of labour migration: Entrepreneurship, Exploitation, Dignity and Development. 

After a keynote speech, three roundtables will focus on the role of migrants as entrepreneurs and job seekers, labour exploitation of migrants, and future perspectives between countries of destination and countries of origin.

Scholars and experts are invited to submit their papers.

[From the introduction to the call] – Despite the ideas and intentions for a more dynamic EU economy, the EU still continues to have national labour markets, with obstacles to a real regime of free movement of not European workers. Migrants whose human rights are duly promoted and respected, who are well integrated in the countries where they live, and who are able to exercise their talents and energy in productive employment and decent work, can contribute mightily to the development of their countries of origin and destination, and to the well-being of their families and communities, while providing economic, social and cultural added value and also pursuing their own development as human beings. A policy framework that is respectful of the human rights and dignity of every human being, in particular of minors, women and vulnerable persons, is a prerequisite for realizing the full developmental potential of international migration and averting negative manifestations such as forced labour, trafficking in human beings, smuggling of migrants, discrimination and xenophobia.

Submissions, accompanied by a summary and a cv, must be sent before 10 October 2015 to migrationconference@puntoeuropa.eu.

Further information available here.

 

La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne (CJUE) est-elle seule compétente pour décider le maintien en vigueur provisoire de dispositions jugées contraires au droit de l’Union par une juridiction nationale ? À cette question, que se posaient les commentateurs de l’arrêt Inter-Environnement Wallonie ASBL (CJU, 28 févr. 2012, n° C-41/11, AJDA 2012. 995, chron. M. Aubert, E. Broussy et F. Donnat ; RFDA 2012. 961, chron. C. Mayeur-Carpentier, L. Clément-Wilz et F.

En carrousel matière:  Non

en lire plus

Le projet de loi portant adaptation de la procédure pénale au droit de l’Union Européenne n°2341 (DADDUE) avait été déposé par le garde des Sceaux le 23 avril 2014. Faute d’accord de la commission mixte paritaire convoquée ce 2 juillet 2015, le projet est renvoyé à la commission des lois de l’Assemblée pour être étudié aux alentours du 15 juillet.

En carrousel matière:  Non

en lire plus

La Commission des lois de l’Assemblée nationale a apporté des modifications au projet de loi sur le droit des étrangers.

En carrousel matière:  Oui

en lire plus

Le déplacement d’un enfant, effectué unilatéralement par la mère assujettie à une interdiction de sortie du territoire d’un État étranger et au mépris du droit du père de participer à la fixation de la résidence de cet enfant, est un déplacement illicite d’enfant au sens de la Convention de La Haye du 25 octobre 1980.

En carrousel matière:  Oui

en lire plus

L’absence d’un des renseignements prévus à l’article 695-13 du code de procédure pénale n’empêche pas la remise de l’intéressé, dès lors que l’État requérant a procédé aux rectifications nécessaires. Mais si les informations qui y sont contenues sont insuffisantes, la chambre de l’instruction est tenue de les solliciter auprès des autorités de l’État d’émission.

En carrousel matière:  Non

en lire plus