Flux européens

Allemagne / Commission
Aide d'État
Le Tribunal confirme que la loi allemande sur les énergies renouvelables de 2012 (EEG 2012) comportait des aides d’État

Allemagne / Commission
Aide d'État
Le Tribunal confirme que la loi allemande sur les énergies renouvelables de 2012 (EEG 2012) comportait des aides d’État

The School of Legal and Social Sciences of the Carlos III University of Madrid has issued a call for papers on the topic of International Family Law Reforms.

The initiative, addressed to young researchers, is intended to select the papers that will be presented in the Young Researchers Round Table, in the framework of the  International Congress on International Family Law Reforms, which will be held in Madrid on 17 and 18 November 2016.

The selected papers may also be published on Cuadernos de Derecho Transnacional.

The deadline for the submission of the abstracts (in English or Spanish) is 15 June 2016.

Further information on the call for papers and on the final conference are available here.

 

Michael Bogdan, Concise Introduction to EU Private International Law, 3a ed., Europa Law Publishing, 2016, pp. 230, ISBN 9789089521774, Euro 38.

[Dal sito dell’editore] – This concise book is mainly intended to be used as an introduction to the rules of private international law belonging to the legal system of the European Union. It provides legal practitioners with an overview of this highly complex field of law and can serve as an introductory textbook in elective undergraduate courses and master programs offered today by many law schools both to their own students and to exchange students from other countries. The book will hopefully also be useful as a spring-board towards more profound studies of statutory texts, case law and legal literature.

L’indice dell’opera è consultabile qui. Maggiori informazioni sono disponibili a questo indirizzo.

Il 20 maggio 2016, l’Università La Sapienza di Roma ospiterà un incontro dedicato al tema del cognome materno, nella prospettiva italiana in materia di attribuzione e di modifica del cognome ai figli, nonché nella prospettiva comparata, internazionale e dell’Unione europea.

Fabrizio Marongiu Buonaiuti (Univ. Macerata) presenterà una relazione dedicata al cognome dei figli nel diritto internazionale privato.

Maggiori informazioni sono disponibili qui.

Prende avvio il 10 e 11 giugno 2016, a Lucca, un ciclo di incontri formativi organizzati nell’ambito del progetto European Civil Procedure for Lawyers: Promoting Training to Improve the Effectiveness of Transnational Justice, cofinanziato dalla Commissione europea e gestito dalle Università  di Torino, Passau e Complutense di Madrid, con il concorso di vari partner accademici e professionali, sotto il coordinamento di Elena D’Alessandro (Univ. Torino).

Il progetto è volto alla formazione degli avvocati degli Stati membri attraverso incontri gratuiti e di taglio pratico aventi ad oggetto il regolamento n. 1215/2012 concernente la competenza giurisdizionale, il riconoscimento e l’esecuzione delle decisioni in materia civile e commerciale (Bruxelles I bis) e la sua interazione con il regolamento n. 805/2004 che istituisce un titolo esecutivo europeo per i crediti non contestati e con il regolamento n. 655/2014 che istituisce una procedura per l’ordinanza europea di sequestro conservativo su conti bancari al fine di facilitare il recupero transfrontaliero dei crediti in materia civile e commerciale.

[Dal sito del progetto] – Objectives: The 2014 EU Justice Scoreboard has revealed that the level of efficiency in national justice systems varies significantly between Member States. While some Member States show good performances in the civil justice area, others perform poorly. One of the reasons for this status quo concerns how national lawyers perform, especially using national and EU legal instruments in civil and commercial matters. The present project aims to bridge this gap by building a partnership between Universities and Bar Associations located in three poorly-performing Member States (Italy, Slovenia and Spain), and one which performs well (Germany). The main objective of this partnership will be that of providing lawyers transnational, practice-oriented, interactive and multi-lingual training on EU legal instruments free of charge, in particular on Regulation No 1215/2012 including its interplay with Regulation No 805/2004 concerning the European Enforcement Order and Regulation No 655/2014 establishing a European Account Preservation Order. Activities: The main activity of the present project will be a series of initial training weekend seminars offered free of charge in more than one official EU language to small target groups of lawyers, domiciled in the Member States involved in the programme. According to the results gained by the pilot project on European Judicial Training conducted by the Councils of Bars and Law Societies of Europe and the EIPA Luxembourg, the adopted approach will be practice-oriented. The training will be offered by teaching teams of academics and practitioners, combining theoretical knowledge and practical skills, as recommended by the EU Communication COM (2011) 551 final. This method will ensure a smooth transition between acquisition of theoretical elements and building skills with a practical application in real national and cross-border working cases.

L’evento iniziale per l’Italia, in programma, come detto nei giorni 10 e 11 giugno 2016 a Lucca, consisterà in un tirocinio formativo a partecipazione attiva con presentazione, discussione e risoluzione di casi concreti rientranti nell’ambito di applicazione del regolamento Bruxelles I bis. La prima giornata sarà dedicata ai criteri di giurisdizione e agli accordi di attribuzione della competenza giurisdizionale, mentre nel secondo giorno si parlerà di litispendenza e di riconoscimento ed esecuzione delle decisioni.

I lavori saranno presieduti da Elena D’Alessandro (Univ. Torino), Silvana Dalla Bontà (Univ. Trento), Antonio Mondini (magistrato del Tribunale di Lucca) e Giampaolo Benedetti Pearson (avvocato del Foro di Lucca).

La partecipazione al seminario è gratuita e prevede la distribuzione di materiali didattici e l’attribuzione di 8 crediti formativi per gli avvocati. La richiesta di iscrizione deve essere inviata tramite e-mail all’indirizzo info@europeancivilprocedureforlawyers.eu non oltre il 6 giugno 2016 (saranno accettati fino ad un massimo di 30 partecipanti).

Ulteriori informazioni sono disponibili qui.

Pologne / Parlement et Conseil
Principes du droit communautaire
La nouvelle directive de l’Union européenne sur les produits du tabac est valide

Pologne / Parlement et Conseil
Principes du droit communautaire
La nouvelle directive de l’Union européenne sur les produits du tabac est valide

Pologne / Parlement et Conseil
Principes du droit communautaire
La nouvelle directive de l’Union européenne sur les produits du tabac est valide

Pologne / Parlement et Conseil
Principes du droit communautaire
La nouvelle directive de l’Union européenne sur les produits du tabac est valide

On 23 May 2016, the University of Milan will host a conference entitled New families – International trends and legal recognition in Italy, chaired by Stefania Bariatti (Univ. Milan).

There will be three sessions. The first two sessions will be devoted to the evolution of family patterns in Europe and the US, respectively. Speakers include Katharina Boele-Woelki (Bucerius Law School, Hamburg), Angelika Fuchs (ERA – Academy of European Law), Patrizia De Luca (European Commission), Suzanne Goldberg and Yasmine Ergas (both Columbia University).

The last session will focus on the legal recognition of new families in Italy. Participants include Monica Cirinnà (Member of the Italian Senate – Rapporteur of the proposed regulation of civil unions in Italy), Ivan Scalfarotto (Member of the Italian Chamber of Deputies), Annibale Marini (Italian Constitutional Court), Marilisa D’Amico and Ilaria Viarengo (both Univ. Milan).

More information available here.

 

Percorsi di diritto societario europeo, a cura di Elisabetta Pederzini, Giappichelli, 2016, pp. XVI-372, ISBN: 9788892102521, Euro 35.

[Indice sommario] Parte Prima: Diritto Societario Italiano e Diritto dell’Unione Europea. – Alla ricerca del diritto applicabile: società italiane e società straniere (E. Pederzini). – L’armonizzazione nel diritto delle società: evoluzione e prospettive (M. Rondinelli). – La libertà di stabilimento delle società europee nell’interpretazione evolutiva della Corte di Giustizia. Armonizzazione e concorrenza tra ordinamenti nazionali (E. Pederzini). – Armonizzazione, concorrenza e convergenza tra ordinamenti: evidenze dal diritto delle società a responsabilità limitata in Europa e in Italia (A. Bartolacelli). – Parte Seconda: Diritto Europeo delle Imprese. – La Società Europea e la Società Cooperativa Europea (M. Bianca – A. Zanardo). – Il progetto di Societas Unius Personae (Single Member Private Limited Liability Company) (R. Guidotti). – Il Gruppo Europeo di Interesse Economico (GEIE) (A. Bartolacelli). – Parte Terza: Circolazione dei Modelli di Governo Societario. – Il sistema di amministrazione e controllo nella società per azioni tedesca (M. Rondinelli). – Gran Bretagna e Stati Uniti: il sistema di amministrazione e controllo delle companies e delle corporations (G. Riolfo).

Maggiori informazioni sono disponibili a questo indirizzo.

I have reported earlier on the 2015 Belgian Act tackling the enforcement of vulture fund litigation. In preparation of a paper on the topic, I have had to translate the (relevant parts of: I have omitted intro- and extroductory parts) the Act. I thought I might as well share. Source reference would be much appreciated if you do employ the translation below.

Geert.

Article 2

When a creditor pursues an unfair benefit by purchasing Government bonds or receivables, his rights vis-à-vis the debtor State are limited to the price paid for the bonds or receivables.

Regardless of the law governing the legal relationship between the creditor and the debtor State, no enforcement title can be obtained in Belgium and no protective or enforcement measure can be taken in Belgium at the request of such creditor in connection with a payment to be received in Belgium if such payment procures an unfair benefit vis-à-vis the creditor.

Pursuing an unfair benefit exists where there is clear disproportion between the purchase price and the bonds or securities’ face value, or between the purchase price of the bonds and the sums actually claimed by the creditor.

Such clear disproportion  must be supplemented by at least one of the following criteria for it to qualify as an unfair benefit:

–         Bankruptcy or suspension of payments of /by the debtor State was established, or imminent, when the bonds or receivables were purchased;

–         The creditor has its seat in a State or territory which

a)       Either is included in the list of uncooperative States and territories as established by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF); or

b)       Meets with the definition of tax haven established per Article 307, para 1, fifth indent of the Income Tax Act 1992; or

c)       Is included in a Government list of States unwilling to negotiate an agreement which in accordance with relevant OECD standards, provides as of 2015 for the automatic exchange of data with Belgium on fiscal and banking matters;

–         The creditor systematically employs litigation to obtain reimbursement of the bonds previously purchased;

–         The creditor has refused to co-operate with the establishment restructuring measures for the debtor State;

–         The creditor has abused the debtor State’s weakened position so to negotiate a clearly imbalanced repayment agreement; or

–         Repayment in full of the sums claimed by the creditor would have a clearly establishable negative impact on the public finances of the debtor State and could endanger the socioeconomic development of its population.

Art.3

This Act does not affect the application of international Treaties, the law of the European Union, or bilateral Treaties.

 

On 2 and 3 June 2016, the Academy of European Law (ERA) will host a workshop in Trier aimed to discuss case-studies and permit exchange of experience on the EU Succession Regulation.

[From the website of the Academy] – The new EU Succession Regulation (EU) No 650/2012, which aims to ameliorate and simplify international inheritance rules, is applicable since 17 August 2015. Due to various uncertainties it still provides for new challenges in cross-border estate planning.  After nearly one year of experience with the Regulation, this seminar will discuss key practical problems for cross-border estates on the basis of real cases and case-studies. Active participation of the participants will be encouraged through a workshop format.

Speakers include Ulf Bergquist (Bergquist & Partners), Astrid Deixler-Hübner (University of Linz), Richard Frimston (Russell-Cooke), Jens Kleinschmidt (University of Trier), Martin Schauer (University of Vienna) and Patrick Wautelet (University of Liège).

See here for further information.

On 20 April 2016, an agreement in principle has been reached within the Permanent Representatives Committee of the Council of the European Union as to the approval of the proposal for a Council Decision — illustrated in this post — authorising enhanced cooperation in the area of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions on the property regimes of international couples, and the transmission of the proposal, as approved, to the European Parliament for consent under Article 329 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

The following Member States have made known their intention to take part in the enhanced cooperation: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden.

L’Università Roma Tre ospita, tra il 2 e il 9 maggio 2016, una serie di incontri dedicati a temi di diritto internazionale privato.

Interverranno, fra gli altri, Javier Carrascosa González (Univ. Murcia), Francesco Salerno (Univ. Ferrara) e Carlo De Stefano (Univ. Bocconi).

Gli incontri, inaugurati in realtà da una lezione di Francesca Pietrangeli (Foro di Roma) tenutasi nelle settimane precedenti, toccano un’ampia varietà di temi, dalla responsabilità per fatto illecito ai contratti, dal divorzio alle successioni mortis causa, dal riconoscimento degli status personali acquisiti all’estero al coordinamento fra giurisdizione e arbitrato.

Maggiori informazioni sono disponibili a questo indirizzo.

On 17 March 2016, the Council on General Affairs and Policy of the Hague Conference on Private International Law decided to set up a Special Commission to prepare a draft Convention on the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments (the Hague Judgments Convention), while endorsing the recommendation of the Working Group on the Judgments Project that matters relating to direct jurisdiction should be put for consideration to the Experts’ Group of the Judgments Project soon after the Special Commission has drawn up a draft Convention.

The Special Commission will meet in the Hague between 1 and 9 June 2016 to discuss the proposed draft text drawn up by the Working Group. The text may be found here, accompanied by an explanatory note prepared by the Permanent Bureau.

As stated in Article 1 of the proposed draft text, the Convention is meant to apply to the recognition and enforcement of judgments “relating to civil and commercial matters”, at the exclusion of matters in the field of family law, the law of persons and successions. Insolvency, the carriage of passengers and goods, marine pollution, liability for nuclear damage and defamation are equally featured in the list of excluded matters.

Article 4(1) provides that a judgment given by a court of a Contracting State must be recognised and enforced in another Contracting State in accordance with the Convention. Recognition and enforcement may be refused only on the grounds specified in the Convention itself.

As a rule, a judgment is eligible for recognition and enforcement if one of the bases listed in Article 5 of the proposed draft text is met, ie, if jurisdiction was asserted in the country of origin in conformity with one of the grounds of jurisdiction contemplated by the Convention.

Suitable grounds include the habitual residence of the defendant (to be understood as meaning, pursuant to Article 3(2), the place where the defendant has its statutory seat, or under whose law it was incorporated, or where it has its central administration or principal place of business), and the defendant’s consent to the jurisdiction of the seised court as expressed in the course of the proceedings.

According to the proposed draft text, a judgment is also eligible for recognition, inter alia: if it ruled on a contractual obligation “and was given in the State in which performance of that obligation took place or should take place under the parties’ agreement or under the law applicable to the contract, unless the defendant’s activities in relation to the transaction clearly did not constitute a purposeful and substantial connection to that State”; if it ruled on a non-contractual obligation arising from personal injury or damage to tangible property, “and the act or omission directly causing such harm occurred in the State of origin, irrespective of where that harm occurred”; if the judgment ruled on an infringement of a patent, trademark, design or other IP right required to be deposited or registered, “and it was given by a court in the State in which the deposit or registration of the right concerned has taken place”; if the judgment ruled on the validity or infringement of copyright or related rights “and the right arose under the law of the State of origin”.

By derogation from Article 5, the proposed draft text sets forth in Article 6 some exclusive bases for recognition and enforcement. In particular, a judgment that ruled on the registration or validity of patents, trademarks, designs, or other similar rights required to be deposited or registered “shall be recognised and enforced if and only if the State of origin is the State in which deposit or registration has been applied for, has taken place, or is deemed to have been applied for or to have taken place under the terms of an international or regional instrument”, while a judgment that ruled on rights in rem in immovable property or tenancies of immovable property for a period of more than six months “shall be recognised and enforced if and only if the property is situated in the State of origin”.

The grounds on which a judgment eligible for recognition and enforcement may nevertheless be denied recognition or enforcement in a Contracting State are enumerated in Article 7.

Specifically, recognition and enforcement may be denied if the document which instituted the proceedings was not notified to the defendant in sufficient time and in such a way as to enable him to arrange for his defence or “was notified to the defendant in the requested State in a manner that is incompatible with fundamental principles of the requested State concerning service of documents”; if the judgment “was obtained by fraud in connection with a matter of procedure”; if recognition or enforcement would be manifestly incompatible with the public policy of the requested State”; if the judgment is inconsistent with a judgment given in the requested State in a dispute between the same parties with an earlier judgment given in another State between the same parties on the same cause of action, provided that the earlier judgment fulfills the conditions necessary for its recognition in the requested State.

Pursuant to Article 9 of the proposed draft text, recognition or enforcement may also be refused “if, and to the extent that, the judgment awards damages, including exemplary or punitive damages, that do not compensate a party for actual loss or harm suffered”.

Article 11 lays down the list of documents to be produced by the party seeking recognition or applying for enforcement of a foreign judgment under the Convention, while Article 12 clarifies that the procedure for recognition, declaration of enforceability or registration for enforcement, and the enforcement of the judgment, are governed by the law of the requested State unless the Convention provides otherwise.

La riforma del regolamento Bruxelles I. Il regolamento (UE) n. 1215/2012 sulla giurisdizione e l’efficacia delle decisioni in materia civile e commerciale, a cura di A. Malatesta, con la collaborazione di G. Vitellino e N. Nisi, Giuffrè, 2016, ISBN: 9788814212451, pp. 238, Euro 20.

[Dal sito dell’editore] – Il volume analizza le novità introdotte dal regolamento (UE) n. 1215/2012 del 12 dicembre 2012 (c.d. «Bruxelles I-bis»), alla disciplina concernente la competenza giurisdizionale e il riconoscimento e l’esecuzione delle decisioni in materia civile e commerciale. Dal 10 gennaio 2015 esso sostituisce il precedente regolamento (CE) n. 44/2001 del 22 dicembre 2000, il quale a sua volta era succeduto, “comunitarizzandola”, alla convenzione di Bruxelles del 1968, oggetto come noto ormai da oltre quarant’anni di applicazione nella prassi giudiziaria italiana. Il nuovo testo modifica in alcuni punti anche sensibilmente – si pensi solo all’abolizione dell’exequatur – la precedente normativa. Gli Autori si soffermano sugli aspetti di maggiore interesse per l’operatore giuridico italiano coinvolto in liti di carattere internazionale. Il volume è corredato da un’appendice completa e ragionata e da informazioni non immediatamente accessibili agli utenti.

L’indice dell’opera può essere consultato qui. Maggiori informazioni a questo indirizzo.

On 3 May 2016, Neža Pogorelčnik Vogrinc (Univ. Ljubljana) will speak of Provisional measures in European civil procedural law in the framework of a workshop at the Rovigo branch of the Department of Law of the University of Ferrara.

Attendance is free. See here for more details.

Borealis Polyolefine
Environnement et consommateurs
La Cour déclare invalide la quantité annuelle maximale de quotas gratuits d’émission de gaz à effet de serre fixée par la Commission pour la période 2013-2020