Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel d'Aix-en-Provence, chambre de l'instruction, 4 août 2016
Pourvoi c/ Tribunal de police de Papeete, 2 juin 2016
Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel de Colmar, 5e chambre civile, 14 avril 2015
One cannot have one’s cake and eat it. Meaning once the cake has been eaten, it is gone and you no longer have it. (Apologies but this saying is so often misunderstood I thought I should clarify).
Anyways, the Flemish tax administration had something along these lines in mind when it recently ruled in a case involving a Liechtenstein Stiftung. Many thanks to De Broeck & Van Laere for bringing the ruling to my attention. The Inland Revenue generally employ quite a lot of deference towards trusts and Stiftungs of all kind. In the case at hand however it requalified the transfer of means from the Stiftung to the heirs of the deceased, as being of a contractual nature. That is because the deceased, upon creation of the Stiftung, had issued such precise instructions in the Stiftung’s by-laws, that the hands of the trustees (or equivalent thereof) had been tied. This essentially takes away a crucial part of the Stiftung’s nature, and no longer shields the assets from the (Flemish) taxman. The cake has been eaten.
Geert.
Dans le cadre de la procédure d’avis sur le Projet d’accord entre le Canada et l’Union européenne sur le transfert et le traitement de données des dossiers passagers, l’avocat général de la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne (CJUE) Mengozzi conclut à l’incompatibilité de l’accord envisagé avec les dispositions de la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne.
On the occasion of Hein Kötz’ 80th birthday in November 2015, a symposium in his honour was held at the Max-Planck-Institute for Comparative and International Private Law in Hamburg/Germany. The presentations given at this event have now been published (in German) by Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen: Zukunftsperspektiven der Rechtsvergleichung, ed. by Reinhard Zimmermann, 2016; XX, 267 pages.
Following an explanation by the editor as to why this is not a Festschrift, the volume contains contributions by Christiane Wendehorst (Vienna) on the comparison of legal systems, by Ralf Michaels (Duke) on religious laws and post-secular comparative law, by Giesela Rühl (Jena) on comparative law and European conflict of laws: the forgotten dimension, by Eva-Maria Kieninger (Würzburg) on principles and basic concepts of property law as objects of comparative law, by Gralf-Peter Calliess (Bremen) on the role of comparative law in the context of a competition between legal orders, by Marc-Philippe Weller (Heidelberg) on future prospects for comparative law in private international and corporate law, and by Jan von Hein (Freiburg/Br.) on market regulation by tort law from a comparative perspective. The book concludes with closing remarks by Hein Kötz.
Further information is available here.
This year does not only mark 30 years since the great reform of German private international law of 1986, but it is also the 35th anniversary of the foundation of the Praxis des Internationalen Privat- und Verfahrensrechts (IPRax). Therefore, Professor Heinz-Peter Mansel, President of the German Council for Private International Law, and Professor Jan von Hein, chairman of the Council’s 2nd Commission, are pleased to announce that a celebratory conference will take place on 23-24 September 2016 at the University of Cologne (Germany) under the title: “Codification of Private International Law: German Experience and European Perspectives Thirty Years After the PIL-Reform of 1986”. The conference, which will be held in German, will look at how Private International Law has evolved in the past and provide an outlook for future responsibilities and challenges of the field.
The conference programme (in German) is available here.
The Faculty of Law of the University of Rome “La Sapienza” will host a German-Italian-Spanish conference on Thursday, 13th October 2016, on International Successions in Europe. The conference has been convened for the presentation of the volume “The EU Succession Regulation: a Commentary”, edited by Alfonso-Luís Calvo Caravaca (University “Carlos III” of Madrid), Angelo Davì (University of Rome “La Sapienza”) and Heinz-Peter Mansel (University of Cologne), published by Cambridge University Press, 2016. The volume is the product of a research project on “The Europeanization of Private International Law of Successions” financed through the European Commission’s Civil Justice Programme.
Here is the programme (available as .pdf):
Welcome addresses: Prof. Enrico del Prato (Director, Department of Legal Sciences, University “La Sapienza”); Prof. Paolo Ridola (Dean, Faculty of Law, University “La Sapienza”); Prof. Angelo Davì (University “La Sapienza”).
First Session
Chair: Prof. Ugo Villani (University of Bari, President of SIDI-ISIL – Italian Society for International Law)
Second Session
Chair: Prof. Sergio Maria Carbone (University of Genova)
Concluding remarks: Prof. Sergio Maria Carbone (University of Genova).
(Many thanks to Prof. Fabrizio Marongiu Buonaiuti, University of Macerata, for the tip-off)
Providing comprehensive and sophisticated analysis of current Chinese conflict of laws, the authors assess the actual judicial practice and case decisions. The book takes into account the historic, political and economic background of the subject matter, as well as relevant empirical evidence and data, especially recognizing the contribution of Chinese scholars in the field. It examined over 300 cases and over 130 legislative and judicial interpretive materials. It concludes that the Chinese conflicts system has entered into the stage of modernization and proposes policy to improve efficiency, prevent local protectionism, balance internationalization and nationalization, democratize legislative process and improve judicial training and judicial practice.
This timely book is an invaluable resource for academics and practitioners in private international law, conflict of laws, international law, international litigation, Chinese law and international civil and commercial matters involving China.
Contents Part I Conflict of Laws in China—History and Concept 1. Conflict of Laws in China—A Historical Perspective 2. Concepts and Preliminary Questions Part II Jurisdiction, Procedure, Foreign Judgments and Awards 3. Jurisdiction in Chinese Courts 4. Declining Jurisdiction in Chinese Courts 5. Selected Procedural Issues in Foreign-Related Litigation in China 6. Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Chinese Courts 7. Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in Chinese Courts Part III Choice of Law 8. Choice of Law in Contracts 9. Choice of Law in Tort 10. Choice of Law in Unjust Enrichment and Negotiorum Gestio 11. Choice of Law in Property 12. Choice of Law in Intellectual Property Part IV Interregional Conflicts and Cooperation 13 Interregional Conflicts and Cooperation between Mainland, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan Part V Final Remarks 14. Chinese Conflict of Laws: Past, Present and Future Critical Acclaim ‘This is an excellent and up-to-date book that enables the English-speaking world to get an accurate and comprehensive understanding of private international law in mainland China. The Chinese system can be said to be a mixed system, in that it is only partially governed by statute and much of the law still emerges from case law and interpretations of the law given by the Supreme People’s Court. The authors point out that only in very few cases do the Chinese courts actually apply foreign law. This tendency of the judges to avoid the application of foreign law is one of several features of the Chinese system of private international law that shows the importance of judicial decisions to understanding how the system actually works. The writers rightly point out areas where Chinese private international law could be improved, with recommendations that China should liberalise its approach to recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments by adopting a de jure approach to reciprocity and by entering into multilateral treaties like the Hague Choice of Court Agreements Convention 2005.’ – Paul Beaumont, University of Aberdeen, UK For full information, see http://www.e-elgar.com/shop/conflict-of-laws-in-the-people-s-republic-of-china.
Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer