Cet arrêt rappelle que les lois relatives à la prescription de l’action publique sont applicables immédiatement à la répression des infractions commises avant leur entrée en vigueur, lorsque les prescriptions ne sont pas acquises.
La violation du secret professionnel ne porte directement préjudice qu’à l’intérêt général et à l’auteur de ces confidences. En conséquence, l’action civile du médecin qui, en sa qualité d’employeur, est indirectement victime d’une violation du secret professionnel par son salarié, est irrecevable.
Professor Paul Beaumont (University of Stirling), Dr Mihail Danov (University of Exeter) and Dr Jayne Holliday (University of Stirling) are delighted to be able to host the final AHRC funded Research Network workshop in partnership with the Journal of Private International Law.
Please note that you are welcome to attend as much or as little of the workshop as you are able.
Programme for Thursday 26 November 2020Chair – Professor Paul Beaumont (University of Stirling and co-editor of the Journal of Private International Law)
10.00-10.30 The Opportunities of Brexit for the development of Private International Law in the Commonwealth
Speaker – Professor Reid Mortensen (University of South Queensland)
10.30-10.45 Questions and discussion
10.45-11.15 Some Reflections to be drawn from the Pilot Study and Future Research Project/s
Speaker – Dr Mihail Danov (University of Exeter)
11.15-11.30 Questions and Discussion
11.30-11.45 Coffee Break
Chair – Dr Jayne Holliday (University of Stirling)
11.45-12.15 Connecting Factors in Private International Law – a global perspective
Speakers – Professor Susanne Goessl (University of Kiel) and Dr Ruth Lamont (University of Manchester)
12.15-12.30 Questions and Discussion
12.30-14.00 Lunch break
Chair – Dr Mihail Danov
14.00-14.45 Pluses and minuses of the UK being a party to the Lugano Convention after Brexit
Speaker – Professor Fausto Pocar (University of Milan)
14.45-15.00 Questions and discussion
Programme for Friday 27 November 2020Chair – Professor Jonathan Harris QC (King’s College London, co-editor of the Journal of Private International Law and Serle Court)
10.30-10.50 Keynote speech by Lord Mance former UK Supreme Court Judge
10.50-11.15 Questions and Discussion and Comments by the Chair
11.15-11.45 Resolving Conflicts of Jurisdiction after Brexit at a global level
Speaker – Dr Ardavan Arzandeh (University of Bristol and soon to be National University of Singapore)
11.45-12.00 Questions and Discussion
Chair – Dr Jayne Holliday
12.00-12.30 The Hague Adults Convention 2000 and the role of the UK and the EU in the Hague Conference after Brexit
Speaker – Professor Pietro Franzina (Catholic University, Milan)
12.30-12.45 Questions and Discussion
Lunch Break
Chair – Dr Mihail Danov
15.00-15.30 Private International Law of Arbitration – a global perspective and the impact of Brexit on arbitration in the UK
Speaker – Professor Giuditta Cordero-Moss (University of Oslo)
15.30-15.45 Questions and Discussion
15.45-16.15 The AHRC Research Network on Private International Law: Some reflections on the way ahead for global private international law.
Speaker – Professor Paul Beaumont
16.15-16.30 Questions and Discussion
Professor Paul Beaumont (University of Stirling), Dr Mihail Danov (University of Exeter) and Dr Jayne Holliday (University of Stirling) are delighted to be able to host the third of four public AHRC workshops on Private International Law after Brexit from global, European, Commonwealth and intra-UK perspective.
Please note that you are welcome to attend as much or as little of the workshop as you are able.
Programme for 19 November 202014:00 – 14:10 – The Workshop and its Context
Professor Paul Beaumont (University of Stirling), AHRC Network on UK Private International Law post Brexit: Project Objectives and Workshop Aims
14:10 – 16:00 – Cross-Border Litigation: Specific Issues in some specific sectors
Chair: Alex Layton QC (King’s College London and Twenty Essex)
Dr Jenny Papettas (University of Birmingham), Cross-Border Motor Claims After Brexit
Professor Yvonne Baatz (Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen Mary University of London), Brexit and Cross-Border Maritime Disputes
Professor Rob Merkin QC (University of Exeter), Cross-Border Dispute Resolution – Insurance Sector: Brexit Implications
Tom Sprange QC (King & Spalding), High-Value Disputes: A US Law Firm’s Perspective on Brexit
Dr Mihail Danov (University of Exeter), Cross-Border Litigation: New Data, Initial Brexit Implications in England and Wales and Long-Term Policy Choices
Questions and discussion
Programme for 20 November 2020
10:00 – 12:00 Global and Commonwealth Perspectives on Private International Law in the UK after Brexit (not restricted to commercial law)
Chair: Professor Paul Beaumont
Professor Mary Keyes (Griffith University, Australia), How Brexit may affect Commonwealth PIL: A View from Australia
Dr Christophe Bernasconi (Secretary General of the Hague Conference), A Global Perspective from the HCCH – the global international institution on private international law
Iain Mackie (Macfarlanes), A London Law Firm Perspective on international and commonwealth litigation after Brexit
Questions and discussion
Break
13:30 – 15:00 – EU/EEA and Intra-UK Commercial PIL: Brexit Challenges and Opportunities
Chair: Professor Eva Lein (University of Lausanne, Switzerland)
Alex Layton QC, Interim Remedies
Professor Barry Rodger (University of Strathclyde), Re-designing (or not) the UK landscape in relation to PIL: An Intra-UK perspective on Brexit
Lindsey Clegg (Freeths), Re-designing (or not) the UK landscape in relation to PIL: A Regional Law Firm Perspective on Brexit
Questions and discussion
20-minute break
15:20 – 16:50 – Brexit and Cross-Border Competition Litigation
Chair: Professor Barry Rodger
Omar Shah (Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP), Brexit and Cross-Border Collective Redress
Nick Frey (Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP), Brexit – A Defendant’s Perspective on Competition Litigation
Dr Mihail Danov, Cross-Border Competition Litigation: Brexit Opportunities?
Questions and discussion
16.50 – 17.15 Prof Paul Beaumont and Dr Mihail Danov, Concluding Remarks and Next Steps
Assurance -Prescription
Assurance (règles générales) - Accident de la circulation
Frais et dépens
Avocat (honoraires)
Contrat d'entretien
Professor Paul Beaumont (University of Stirling), Dr Mihail Danov (University of Exeter) and Dr Jayne Holliday (University of Stirling) are delighted to be able to host the following AHRC funded Research Network workshop.
How to join the online workshop:
Any queries please contact Dr Jayne Holliday at j.holliday@stir.ac.uk
The Development of Private International Law in the UK post Brexit
AHRC Research Network Workshop II – Family Law – Programme
Friday 6 November 2020
10.00-10.15 – Welcome and introduction by Dr Jayne Holliday (University of Stirling)
10.15-10.45 – Hague Intercountry Adoption Convention – how it should be interpreted and applied by Laura Martínez-Mora (Secretary, Hague Conference on Private International Law)
10.45-11.00 – Discussion
11.00-11.15 – Break
11.15-11.45 – Private International Law of Family Agreements after Brexit by Alexandre Boiché (French advocate, member of the Experts’ Group on Family Agreements at the Hague Conference on Private International Law)
11.45-12.15 – International Surrogacy and International Parentage – hopes for a global solution by Professor Giacomo Biagioni (University of Cagliari)
12.15-12.30 – Discussion
12.30-13.30 – Break for lunch
13.30-14.00 – Private International Law of Parental Responsibility (Custody and Access) after Brexit by Professor Thalia Kruger (University of Antwerp)
14.00-14.30 – Private International Law of Divorce after Brexit by Dr Máire Ní Shúilleabháin (University College Dublin)
14.30-14.45 Discussion
14.45-15.00 Break
15.00-16.00 – Keynote speech by Lord Justice Moylan ‘International Family Justice – Where are we Going?’
16.00-16.30 – Concluding remarks incorporating some comments on maintenance after by Brexit by Professor Paul Beaumont (University of Stirling)
Carsten Gerner-Beuerle (University College London & European Corporate Governance Institute – ECGI), Federico M. Mucciarelli (Università degli studi di Modena e Reggio Emilia – UNIMORE), Edmund Schuster (London School of Economics) and Mathias Siems (European University Institute – EUI, Durham University and European Corporate Governance Institute – ECGI) have posted Making the Case for a Rome V Regulation on the Law Applicable to Companies on SSRN.
The abstract reads:
There is significant legal variation and uncertainty in the conflict of laws rules applicable to companies in the EU. While the case law of the Court of Justice on the freedom of establishment has clarified some questions, it is evident that case law cannot provide for an adequate level of legal certainty. The main recommendation of this paper is that private international company law in the EU should be harmonised. The paper discusses the main challenges that a future regulation to this effect – called here ‘Rome V Regulation on the Law Applicable to Companies’ – would have to overcome. Some of those are of a political nature: for instance, countries may fear that it may become easier for companies to evade domestic company law (eg, rules of employee co-determination), and there are specific considerations that concern companies established in third countries. Another challenge is that a future regulation on the law applicable to companies has to be consistent with existing EU conflict of laws rules as regards, for example, insolvency and tort law, while also complying with the freedom of establishment of the Treaty. It is the aim of this paper to discuss these questions in detail, notably the general considerations for harmonisation in this field, a potential harmonisation based on the ‘incorporation theory’, how it may be possible to overcome some contentious issues such as the definition of the lex societatis or the relationship between the lex societatis and other areas of law, and the prospects of future international harmonisation.
A revised version of the paper will be published in the Yearbook of European Law.
“The collective defence of consumers’ rights has come a step closer. Following the agreement reached with the European Parliament in June 2020, the Council today adopted its position at first reading on a draft directive on representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers within the EU.
The directive requires member states to put in place a system of representative actions for the protection of consumers’ collective interests against infringements of Union law. It covers actions for both injunctions and redress measures.
It empowers qualified entities designated as such by member states to seek injunctions and/or redress, including compensation or replacement, on behalf of a group of consumers that has been harmed by a trader who has allegedly infringed one of the EU legal acts set out in the annex to the directive. These legal acts cover areas such as financial services, travel and tourism, energy, health, telecommunications and data protection.
The directive distinguishes between qualified entities entitled to bring actions in the member state where they have been designated (domestic representative actions) and those entitled to bring actions in any other member state (cross-border representative actions). For domestic actions a qualified entity will have to fulfil the criteria set out in the law of its member state of designation, whereas for cross-border actions it will have to fulfil the harmonised criteria set out in the directive.
As a safeguard against abusive litigation, the directive provides clear rules on the allocation of judicial costs in a representative action for redress based on the ‘loser pays’ principle. Furthermore, with a view to avoiding conflicts of interest, it imposes on qualified entities a number of transparency requirements, in particular as regards their funding by third parties.
The directive will apply to representative actions brought on or after the date of its application”.
The text of the directive as of 21 October 2020 is attached to this post.
collective-redress-21-october-2020Download“The Council today adopted two recast regulations, one on the taking of evidence and a second on the service of documents, to modernise cross-border exchanges between authorities through digitalisation. After reaching a political agreement with the European Parliament in June 2020, the text will now be submitted to the Parliament for its final adoption.
[…] Changes in both regulations include the mandatory use of a decentralised IT system, composed of interconnected national IT systems, for the transmission of documents and requests between member states.
Regarding the service of documents, under the new rules documents can be served electronically and directly to an addressee with a known address in another member state, when their express consent is given in advance. The service can be performed through qualified electronic registered delivery services or, under additional conditions, by e-mail.
The new rules also promote the use of videoconferencing or other distance communication technology in the taking of evidence which implies hearing a witness, party or expert located in another member state”.
The text of the adopted Evidence and Service Regulations are attached to this post.
evidence-regulation-22-october-2020Download service-regulation-22-october-2020DownloadContrat de travail, rupture
Filiation
Contrat de travail, exécution
Presse - Diffamation
Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer