Agrégateur de flux

Le procès du père Preynat, gouffre de la douleur

Le procès du prêtre Bernard Preynat poursuivi pour agressions sexuelles sur dix scouts, âgés de 7 à 15 ans entre 1986 et 1989, a lieu au tribunal judiciaire de Lyon. Il encourt jusqu’à dix ans de prison.

en lire plus

Catégories: Flux français

Réhabilitation judiciaire : à quelles conditions ?

La chambre de l’instruction saisie d’une demande en réhabilitation judiciaire doit apprécier, au regard de la nature et de la gravité de la condamnation concernée, si le comportement du requérant pendant le délai d’épreuve doit conduire au prononcé de la mesure sollicitée et ne peut se contenter de prendre en considération la seule nature des faits ayant conduit à cette condamnation.

en lire plus

Catégories: Flux français

Arrêt n°24 du 16 janvier 2020 (16-24.352) - Cour de cassation - Troisième chambre civile<br> - ECLI:FR:CCASS:2020:C300024

Cour de cassation française - jeu, 01/16/2020 - 15:01

Responsabilité délictuelle ou quasi délictuelle - Construction immobilière

Catégories: Flux français

Ships classification and certification agencies: The immunity ship ain’t sailing according to Szpunar AG in Rina.

GAVC - jeu, 01/16/2020 - 01:01

In C‑641/18 Szpunar AG opined on Tuesday and notes that the request of the referring court brings to mind the current debate about the influence of human rights on private international law. It seeks to ascertain whether and, if so, to what extent the scope of ‘civil and commercial’ in the Brussels Ia Regulation may be influenced by the interest in ensuring access to the courts, a right guaranteed by Article 47 Charter.

(The case itself is subject to Brussels I which did not yet include ‘acta iure imperii’. As the AG notes at 56, this is merely a clarification following CJEU interpretation of the previous concept.

Relatives of the victims, along with survivors of the sinking of the Al Salam Boccaccio ’98, a ship sailing under the flag of the Republic of Panama, which happened in 2006 on the Red Sea and caused the loss of more than a thousand lives, have brought an action before the District Court, Genoa against the companies Rina SpA et Ente Registro Italiano Navale. Claimants argue that the defendant’s certification and classification activities, the decisions they took and the instructions they gave, are to blame for the ship’s lack of stability and its lack of safety at sea, which are the causes of its sinking.

Defendants plead immunity from jurisdiction. They state that they are being sued in respect of certification and classification activities which they carried out as delegates of a foreign sovereign State, namely the Republic of Panama. They argue activities in question were a manifestation of the sovereign power of the foreign State and the defendants carried them out on behalf of and in the interests of that State.

The AG first of all reviews how the principle of customary international law concerning the jurisdictional immunity of States relates to the scope ratione materiae of Brussels Ia. He starts his analysis noting that in the absence of codification at international level (international conventions on the issue not having met with great success), the principle concerning the jurisdictional immunity of States remains to a large extent governed by customary international law.

There is little use in quoting large sections of the Opinion verbatim so please do refer to the actual text: the AG opines (referring ia to C-154/11 Mahamdia) that it is unnecessary to refer to the principle of customary international law concerning State immunity from jurisdiction when considering the scope ratione materiae of Brussels Ia. Those principles he suggests do play a role when it comes to enforcing any exercise of such jurisdiction against the will of the party concerned.

At 46: ‘the distinction between disputes which are civil or commercial matters and those which are not must be drawn by reference to the independent criteria of EU law identified by the Court in its case-law. Consequently, an act performed in the exercise of State authority (acta iure imperii) from the perspective of the law relating to immunity, is not necessarily the same as an act performed in the exercise of State authority according to the independent criteria of EU law.’ (The latter as readers of the blog will know, are not always clearly expressed; see ia my review of Buak).

In the second place, the AG then considers whether an action for damages brought against private-law entities concerning their classification and/or certification activities falls within the scope of BIa. At 83, following extensive review of the case-law (almost all of which I also reviewed on the blog and for earlier cases, in Chapter 2 of the Handbook), the AG opines that neither the fact that the acts in question were performed on behalf of and in the interests of the delegating State nor the possibility of the State’s incurring liability for harm caused by those acts, in itself conclusively characterises those acts as ones performed in the exercise of powers falling outside the scope of the ordinary legal rules applicable to relationships between private individuals. 814/79 Rüffer also makes a non-conclusive appearance.

At 95 then follows the core of the factual assessment: defendants’ role is limited to carrying out checks in accordance with a pre-defined regulatory framework. If, following the revocation of a certificate, a ship is no longer able to sail, that is because of the sanction which, as the defendants admitted at the hearing, is imposed by Panama law. Not acta iure imperii – the issue falls under Brussels Ia.

Finally, must as a result of a plea of immunity from jurisdiction a national court decline to exercise the jurisdiction which it ordinarily derives from the Regulation? In a section which will be interesting to public international lawyers, the AG reviews international and EU law (particularly Directive 2009/15) and concludes that there is no principle in international law which grants immunity to certification agencies in cases such as the one at hand.

To complete the analysis, the AG opines that should the Court disagree with his views on immunity, the national court’s views on jurisdiction would not be impacted by the right to court guarantees of the Charter, for there is no suggestion at all that the victims would not have proper access to Panamian courts for their action.

Note of course that the Opinion does not address lex causae.

Geert.

(Handbook of) EU private international law, 2nd ed. 2016, Chapter 2, Heading 2.2.16.1.1.

 

Un jeune hacker jugé pour s’être attaqué à un site du ministère de la justice

Ce jeune hacker français avait piraté un site du ministère de la justice. En détention préventive dans un autre dossier, il a été condamné lundi 13 janvier à quatre mois de prison avec sursis.

en lire plus

Catégories: Flux français

Procès du père Preynat : « Ce qui vous a arrêté, c’est la honte publique ! »

Le procès du prêtre Bernard Preynat poursuivi pour agressions sexuelles sur dix scouts, âgés de 7 à 15 ans entre 1986 et 1989, a lieu au tribunal de grande instance de Lyon. Il encourt jusqu’à dix ans de prison.

en lire plus

Catégories: Flux français

Pages

Sites de l’Union Européenne

 

Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer