Agrégateur de flux

Pourvoi c. déc. Cour d'appel de Versailles du 16 février 2021

Pourvoi c. déc. Cour d'appel de Versailles du 16 février 2021

Pourvoi c. décision Cour d'appel de Versailles du 16 février 2021

Pourvoi c. décision Cour d'appel de Versailles du 16 février 2021

Tribunal judiciaire de Douai

Pourvoi c. déc. Cour d'appel de Riom du 12 janvier 2021

Puigdemont i Casamajó e.a. / Parlement
Le vice-président du Tribunal de l’Union européenne rejette la demande de suspension de la levée de l’immunité parlementaire de MM. Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó et Antoni Comín i Oliveres ainsi que de Mme Clara Ponsatí i Obiols

Pourvoi c. déc. Cour d'appel de Paris du 3 mars 2021

“Comment concilier, au vu notamment de la décision n° 2010-8 QPC du 18 juin 2010 du Conseil constitutionnel :

les dispositions localement toujours en vigueur du décret modifié n° 57-245 du 24.02.1957, promulgué par l'arrêté n° 2079 du 25.11.1957 (JONC des 9 et 16.12.1957, p. 672) ?” sur la réparation et la prévention des accidents du travail et des maladies professionnelles dans les Territoires d'Outre-Mer, et notamment ses articles 34 et 35,

les dispositions des articles 6-1 et suivants de l'ordonnance n° 92-1146 du 12 octobre 1992 portant extension et adaptation dans les territoires de Nouvelle-Calédonie, de Polynésie Française et des îles Wallis et Futuna, de certaines dispositions de la loi n° 85-677 du 5 juillet 1985 tendant à l'amélioration de la situation des victimes d'accidents de la circulation et à l'accélération des procédures d'indemnisation,

et les dispositions de l'article 7 de l'ordonnance n° 2013-516 du 20 juin 2013 portant actualisation du droit civil applicable en Nouvelle-Calédonie et dans les îles Wallis et Futuna, qui créent une nouvelle sous-section étendant à la Nouvelle-Calédonie et aux îles Wallis et Futuna les règles relatives aux tiers payeurs de la loi du 5 juillet 1985,
Au regard des demandes formulées en Nouvelle-Calédonie par la caisse des allocations familiales et des accidents de travail (CAFAT), dont les missions sont comparables à la caisse primaire d'assurance maladie (CPAM), à l'encontre de l'employeur dont la faute inexcusable a été établie, tendant au remboursement des débours correspondant généralement aux préjudices patrimoniaux temporaires décomposés en :

dépenses des santé actuelles (frais d'hospitalisation, de radiologie, de pharmacie, de kinésithérapie, de laboratoire et de prothèses),
pertes de gains professionnels actuels (indemnités journalières) ?”

Pourvoi c. déc. Cour d'appel de Lyon du 26 janvier 2021

Tribunal judiciaire de Paris

Tribunal judiciaire de Boulogne-sur-Mer

Jindal Society of International Law, in pursuance of fostering fruitful conversations on international law, is delighted to present and host the Fall Lecture Series of 2021, titled ‘Exploring the Ecosystem of International Law’. The lecture on ‘Private Law Remedy for Breaches of International Law Norms’ is the first lecture in this twenty-three part lecture series, which is being held from August to November 2021.

About Jindal Society of International Law

The Jindal Society of International Law is a student-led initiative under the aegis of the Centre for the Study of United Nations of Jindal Global Law School, and the guidance of Faculty Coordinator Professor (Dr.) Vesselin Popovski. Founded in 2020, this Society is an initiative to provide a platform to young international law enthusiasts.The purpose of this Society is to increase student interaction with the subject matter of International Law through its various initiatives. Rather than being primarily research-driven, we intend to offer a host of experiences that contribute towards skill-building, thereby increasing the knowledge database available to students. This Society is an attempt to bridge the lacuna by streamlining resources and inculcating an overall interest in the vast expanses of International Law. We aim to provide a space to young international law enthusiasts to nurture their interest in the field.

About the Lecture Series ‘Exploring the Ecosystem of International Law’

Our Fall Lecture Series of 2021, ‘Exploring the Ecosystem of International Law’, builds upon the introduction given on internationalism and international law by the concluded Spring Lecture Series, titled ‘Future of Internationalism and International Law’. The Fall Series endeavours to study the different contours of international law. To assist in this study, the speakers will cover and address their respective areas of expertise, based upon their years of research and practice. Given the vast ecosystem and the engagement of international law in it, the Society aims to study the fragmentation and fertilisation of the various disciplines in this ecosystem.

The lowest common denominator in this Fall Lecture Series is to enhance and provide a deeper understanding of international law through international lawyers. The Society, for its Members, is a well of knowledge and a quorum of thought provoking discussions, which will be resultant of this engagement with experts aimed at exploring the ecosystem of international law.

About the Lecture ‘Private Remedy for Breaches of International Law Norms’

The first lecture of our Fall 2021 Lecture Series, ‘Exploring the Ecosystem of International Law’, is on the topic ‘Private Remedy for Breaches of International Law Norms’. The lecture will be hosted online and is scheduled for 17:00 IST on 6th August 2021. The distinguished speaker for this lecture is Ms. Vasuda Sinha and with this lecture being the inaugural session, the opening remarks shall be given by Professor Dr. Vesselin Popovski.

Join Us for this Interesting Lecture!

In order to be a part of this lecture, attendees are requested to register themselves for the lecture through the following the link: https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/164448390563. Kindly register yourself as soon as possible to not miss out on this lecture, given that there are limited number of seats!

The lecture will be held online on Zoom and will also be simultaneously be live-streamed on YouTube. The registration link provides for all the necessary information regarding this.

For any further queries or for additional information regarding the Fall 2021 Lecture Series or other initiatives of Jindal Society of International Law, kindly visit our website.You can also follow and engage with us on LinkedIn, Twitter and Instagram!

 

A thought-provoking and much welcome contribution was posted by Prof. Dr. Dres. h.c. Burkhard Hess on SSRN, setting the stage for the discussion on the status quo in the application and the prospects of the Brussels IbisRegulation.

The article, titled “Reforming the Brussels Ibis Regulation: Perspectives and Prospects”, may be retrieved here.

The abstract reads as follows:

According to article 79 of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, the EU Commission shall present a report on the application of the Brussels Ibis Regulation by 11 January 2022. This paper intends to open the discussion about the present state of affairs and the necessary adjustments of the Regulation. Although there is no need to change its basic structure, the relationship of the Brussels Ibis Regulation with other EU instruments (as the General Data Protection Regulation) should be reviewed. There is also a need to address third-State relationships and cross-border collective redress. In addition, the paper addresses several inconsistencies within the present Regulation evidenced by the case law of the CJEU: such as the concept of contract (article 7 no 1), the place of damage (article 7 no 2), the protection of privacy and the concept of consumers (articles 17 – 19). Finally, some implementing procedural rules of the EU Member States should be harmonised, i.e. on the assessment of jurisdiction by national courts, on judicial communication and on procedural time limits. Overall, the upcoming review of the Brussels Ibis Regulation opens up an opportunity to improve further a central and widely accepted instrument of the European law of civil procedure.

The new issue of International & Comparative Law Quarterly (Volume 70, Issue 3) is out. Some of articles concern directly or indirectly questions of private international law. Their abstracts are provided below.

The whole issue is available here. Some of articles are available in open access.

A. Poon, Determining the Place of Performance under Article 7(1) of the Brussels I Recast, pp. 635-663

This article calls for a reassessment of the methodology in determining the place of contractual performance under Article 7(1) of the Brussels I Regulation Recast. The first part of the article deals with Article 7(1)(a). It argues that in light of the adoption of autonomous linking factors under Article 7(1)(b), more types of contracts presently not covered within the ambits of Article 7(1)(b) should centralise jurisdiction at the places of performance of their characteristic obligations. The second part of the article considers the way Article 7(1) operates when there are multiple places of performance under the contract. The test devised by the Court of Justice of the European Union in this regard is not only difficult to apply, but the application of the test also often does not guarantee a close connection between the claim and the court taking jurisdiction. This article argues that when a claim is made in respect of a contractual obligation to be performed in more than one Member State, Article 4 should be applied instead of Article 7(1).

A. Xu, A New Solution Concerning Choice-of-Law for the Assignment of Debts, pp. 665-696. Available in open access.

This article explores a solution to the choice-of-law issues concerning both voluntary and involuntary assignments arising in a domestic forum. The focus is on English private international law rules relating to cross-border assignments. A distinction is made between primary and extended parties as the foundation for choice-of-law analysis. Drawing on insights from the distinction of the use value and exchange value of debts found in economics, this article proposes a new analytical framework for choice-of-law based on a modified choice-of-law theory of interest-analysis.

S. Caserta, P. Cebulak, Resilience Techniques of International Courts in Times of Resistance to International Law, pp. 737-768

International courts are increasingly called upon to adjudicate socially divisive disputes. They are therefore exposed to a heightened risk of backlash that questions their authority and impedes the implementation of their judgments. This article puts forward an analytical framework for mapping the resilience techniques used by international courts to counter this growing resistance. Case studies involve the Court of Justice of the European Union, which has been cautious in its stance regarding democratic backsliding in Hungary and Poland, and the Caribbean Court of Justice, which has engaged in legal diplomacy while adjudicating both on the land rights of indigenous groups and on Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Queer and Intersex (LGBTQI) rights. It is argued that, in order to effectively avoid and mitigate backlash, international courts should deploy resilience techniques that go beyond merely exercising their judicial function. The successful deployment of resilience techniques can allow international courts to become significant actors in global governance during a time of crisis for the international liberal order.

Non lieu à renvoi

Non lieu à renvoi

Pourvoi c. déc. Cour d'appel d'Aix-en-Provence du 29 mars 2021

Pourvoi c. déc. Cour d'appel de Paris du 3 mars 2021

Pourvoi c. déc. Cour d'appel de Paris du 3 mars 2021