Agrégateur de flux

Tribunal correctionnel de Dijon, 6 janvier 2017

Tribunal correctionnel de Valence, 8 décembre 2016

Chambre de l'instruction de la Cour d'appel de Riom, 3 janvier 2017

Conseil de Prud'hommes de Valenciennes, 3 janvier 2017

Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel de Bordeaux, 3e chambre correctionnelle, 24 août 2016

Conseil régional de discipline des avocats du ressort de la Cour d'appel de Rennes, 16 décembre 2016

There is just a month to go for the Private International Law: Embracing Diversity event taking place in Edinburgh, organized by the University in cooperation with several other institutions from the UK and abroad. The updated program of this one-day meeting of PIL experts can be downloaded here. Please remember the venue (St. Trinnean’s Room, St. Leonard’s Hall – University of Edinburgh, EH16 5AY), and also that registration is required at www.law.ed.ac.uk/events (attendance fee: £40.00 per attendee).

Nausicaa Anadyomène et Banque d'Escompte / BCE
Droit institutionnel
La BCE n’est pas tenue de réparer le préjudice prétendument subi en 2012 par les banques commerciales détenant des titres de créance grecs dans le cadre de la restructuration de la dette grecque

La giurisprudenza italiana sui regolamenti europei in materia civile e commerciale e di famiglia, edited by / a cura di Stefania Bariatti, Ilaria Viarengo, Francesca Clara Villata, Cedam, 2016, pp. 527, ISBN 9788813358686, EUR 55

Il volume che si licenzia rappresenta l’opera conclusiva delle attività svolte da un gruppo di ricerca dell’Università degli Studi di Milano nell’ambito del progetto internazionale di ricerca “Cross-border litigation in Europe: Private International Law – Legislative framework, national courts and the Court of Justice of the European Union” – EUPILLAR, finanziato dalla Direzione generale Giustizia e consumatori della Commissione europea, iniziato il 1° ottobre 2014 e conclusosi il 30 settembre 2016. Oggetto dell’indagine sono stati alcuni regolamenti dell’Unione europea in materia di diritto internazionale privato e processuale, adottati nel settore della cooperazione giudiziaria in materia civile, e la relativa giurisprudenza italiana, anche sotto il profilo di un proficuo dialogo dei giudici nazionali con la Corte di giustizia dell’Unione europea. L’indagine è stata condotta in parallelo dai partner del consorzio di ricerca, vale a dire, accanto all’Università degli Studi di Milano, nelle sue due componenti del Dipartimento di Diritto pubblico italiano e sovranazionale e del Dipartimento di Studi internazionali, giuridici e storico-politici, l’Università di Aberdeen (Scozia), che ha coordinato il progetto, le Università di Anversa (Belgio), Breslavia (Polonia), Friburgo (Germania), Leeds (Inghilterra) e Madrid (Universidad Complutense, Spagna). 

Tribunal de grande instance de Paris, 18e chambre, 2e section, 14 décembre 2016

La Cour européenne des droits de l’homme (CEDH) déclare irrecevable le recours de la société UBS AG demandant l’annulation d’un cautionnement, s’élevant à 1,1 milliard d’euros, exigé par les juges français à la suite de leur enquête. 

en lire plus

Il appartient au juge d’interpréter souverainement la loi étrangère applicable, sauf dénaturation.

en lire plus

Le procès de Téodoro Obiang a été reporté au 19 juin 2017 pour laisser le temps à ce dernier de préparer sa défense. Mais au juste, de quoi est il accusé ? Et pourquoi les tribunaux français sont-ils amenés à juger un ressortissant de la Guinée-Équatoriale exerçant des responsabilités gouvernementales dans son pays, qui plus est ?

en lire plus

Tribunal de grande instance de Dieppe, 15 décembre 2016

Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel d'Angers, chambre de l'instruction, 1er juin 2016

Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel de Colmar, 2e chambre civile, section A, 27 mai 2016

Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel de Paris, pôle 5, chambre 5-7, 16 juin 2016

My colleague Adriani Dori (MPI Luxembourg) kindly reminded me today: EU Regulation 655/2014 applies from 18 January 2017.

There is as yet no EU harmonisation on amino acids, in so far as they have a nutritional or physiological effect and are added to foods or used in the manufacture of foods. A range of EU foodlaws therefore do not apply to national action vis-a-vis amino acids, in particular Regulation 1925/2006 – the food supplements Regulation. In the absence of specific EU law rules regarding prohibition or restriction of the use of other substances or ingredients containing those ‘other substances’, relevant national rules may apply ‘without prejudice to the provisions of the Treaty’.

In C-282/15 Queisser Pharma v Germany, moreover there were no transboundary elements: Articles 34-36 TFEU therefore do not in principle apply.

No doubt food law experts may tell us whether these findings are in any way unusual, however my impression is that the Court of Justice in this judgment stretches the impact of the ‘general principles of EU food law’ as included in Regulation  178/2002. Indeed the Court refers in particular to Article 1(2)’s statement that the Regulation lays down the general principles governing food and feed in general, and food and feed safety in particular, at EU and national level (my emphasis). Article 7 of the Regulation is of particular relevance here. That Article gives a definition of the precautionary principle, and consequential constraints on how far Member States may go in banning foodstuffs, as noted in the absence of EU standards and even if there is no cross-border impact.

Article 7 Precautionary principle

1. In specific circumstances where, following an assessment of available information, the possibility of harmful effects on health is identified but scientific uncertainty persists, provisional risk management measures necessary to ensure the high level of health protection chosen in the Community may be adopted, pending further scientific information for a more comprehensive risk assessment.

2. Measures adopted on the basis of paragraph 1 shall be proportionate and no more restrictive of trade than is required to achieve the high level of health protection chosen in the Community, regard being had to technical and economic feasibility and other factors regarded as legitimate in the matter under consideration. The measures shall be reviewed within a reasonable period of time, depending on the nature of the risk to life or health identified and the type of scientific information needed to clarify the scientific uncertainty and to conduct a more comprehensive risk assessment.

Germany on this point is probably found wanting (‘probably’, because final judgment on the extent of German risk assessment is left to the national court) – reference is best made to the judgment for the Court’s reasoning. It is clear to me that the way in which the Regulation defines precaution, curtails the Member States considerably. Further ammunition against the often heard, and wrong, accusation that the EU is trigger happy to ban substances and processes in the face of uncertainty.

Geert.

 

En application de la Convention franco-marocaine du 5 octobre 1957, « le juge vérifie si la décision dont l’exequatur est demandé est, d’après la loi du pays où elle a été rendue, passée en force de chose jugée et susceptible d’exécution ».

en lire plus