Feed aggregator

Berlington Hungary e.a.
Rapprochement des législations
La législation hongroise qui interdit l’exploitation des machines à sous hors des casinos peut être contraire au principe de la libre prestation des services

Base Company et Mobistar
Rapprochement des législations
La directive « service universel » n’établit pas une obligation de tarification sociale pour les communications et abonnements Internet mobiles

Fahnenbrock
Espace de liberté, sécurité et justice
Les actions en justice introduites en Allemagne contre l’État grec par des particuliers suite à l’échange forcé de leurs obligations d’État peuvent être notifiées à cet État selon le règlement UE sur la notification

I have delayed reporting on this initiative for exam reasons. The Belgian Parliament is currently debating a private members’ proposal for statute to address so-called ‘vulture funds’. These funds are described by the financial dictionary as ‘A fund that buys distressed debt of commercial companies or sovereign nations at a cheap price and then often sues them for the entire value of the debt. The resemblance to vultures is because these funds profit from the debt of failing companies or poor nations.‘

The text of the proposal (in Dutch and French) is available here. Vulture funds litigation is generally called immoral in the proposal. Reference is made to a number of high-profile recent judgments where vulture funds have been given approval by various courts worldwide, to seek redress against assets held by the sovereign nations concerned, or indeed their creditors. Particularly sore is the enforcement sought against funds destined for development aid.

The proposal essentially defines ‘vulture funds’ and then suggests that recognition and enforcement of relevant judgments or arbitral awards, regardless of the law applicable to the underlying relationship with the government concerned, is considered to be contrary to Belgian ordre public international, hence unenforceable. The proposal as it stands now adds (probably superfluously) that relevant EU (read: the Brussels I recast Regulation) and international (read especially: the 1958 New York Convention) law takes priority.

The part of the proposal that is bound to attract attention is the attempt at defining the ‘vulture’ in vulture funds. Frits Bolkestein for instance (former EU Commissioner) has remarked that buying up ‘bad debt’ need not always be morally reprehensible (I would suggest it is not that part of the fund’ activities which has attracted the Belgian Parliament’s attention). The enforcement /recognition part of the proposal is interesting because it applies ordre public in a categorical manner, rather than in the ad hoc application which both EU law and residual Belgian conflicts law (the Belgian Private International Law Act) ordinarily call for. For residual Belgian law, this is probably Parliament’s prerogative. However for EU law (and the New York convention), a general apprehension against vulture funds may not qualify as a proper exercise of the ordre public exception. Courts at the least may wish formally to disregard the act when the judgment /award concerned is covered by Brussels I cq. New York; however they can point to the sentiment expressed in the Act, to support incompatibility with Belgian ordre public when tested against an individual case.

The drafters are aware that this initiative may be a drop in the ocean. Reference is made to other, national initiatives (France, UK, US) which may point to an emerging pattern of anti-vulture funds sentiment. Indeed the realities of forum shopping mean that vulture funds action will migrate away from the Belgian legal order. On the other hand, Belgium’s safe harbour may also mean that relevant assets will seek refuge there. All of course, presuming the initiative will actually be adopted by Parliament.

Geert. Disclosure: I advised the MPs concerned on the technical aspects of the recognition and enforcement leg of the proposal. [My advice may or may not have been followed ].

Les questions posées au jury, laconiques, ne permettent pas aux requérants, acquittés en première instance et condamnés en appel, de disposer des garanties suffisantes pour comprendre le verdict de condamnation, ce qui constitue une violation du droit au procès équitable. 

En carrousel matière:  Oui

en lire plus

Non renvoyée au Conseil constitutionnel

Le Défenseur des droits, Jacques Toubon, et la Défenseure des enfants, Geneviève Avenard, ont dévoilé hier à la presse les 128 recommandations contenues dans le rapport qu’ils ont remis au Comité des droits de l’enfant de l’Organisation des Nations-Unies (ONU). Ils déplorent notamment l’absence de mise en place, en France, d’une stratégie nationale durable en faveur des droits des enfants.

En carrousel matière:  Non

en lire plus

La Cour de cassation rappelle l’obligation incombant au parquet, conformément aux dispositions de l’article 197 du code de procédure pénale, d’aviser à la fois la personne recherchée et son avocat, de la date d’audience de la chambre de l’instruction chargée de statuer en matière de mandat d’arrêt européen.

En carrousel matière:  Non

en lire plus

L’article 23, § 2, du règlement Bruxelles I doit être interprété en ce sens que la technique d’acceptation par « clic » des conditions générales d’un contrat de vente, conclu par voie électronique, qui contiennent une convention attributive de juridiction, constitue une transmission par voie électronique permettant de consigner durablement cette convention, lorsque cette technique rend possible l’impression et la sauvegarde du texte de celles-ci avant la conclusion du contrat, même dans l’hypothèse où après l’acceptation des conditions générales, il est nécessaire de cliquer sur un hyperlien pour les consulter.

En carrousel matière:  Non

en lire plus