Agrégateur de flux

Vendredi 16 octobre, la cour d’assises de Paris a condamné un homme de 88 ans à quatre ans d’emprisonnement avec sursis, pour le meurtre de son épouse, commis dans la nuit du 24 au 25 avril 2017. Une peine clémente qui sanctionne un geste de désespoir. Face à la déchéance de sa femme atteinte de la maladie, il voulait mettre fin à leur « commune souffrance ».

en lire plus

Non lieu à renvoi

Peines

Action civile

Questions préjudicielles

Me Julien Andrez, avocat de Jacques Lebigre, a déposé ce mardi une requête en récusation contre la présidente de la 32e chambre du correctionnel de Paris, car son fils avocat a défendu une personne en lien avec des acteurs du dossier des « achats de votes » à Corbeil-Essonnes.

en lire plus

A free webinar on Access to Justice in cross-border Litigation: Lugano v. the Hague will take place on 27 October 2020, at 12.00 CET, organised by the UK Law Societies Joint Brussels Office.

The webinar aims at exploring the implications of the UK leaving the EU system of enforcement and recognition of judgments in civil and commercial matters on access to justice for citizens.

In particular, the speakers will examine what the future relationship of the UK and EU regarding the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters will look like under both the Lugano Convention and alternatively, The Hague Judgments Convention. The panel will discuss the consequences of both scenarios on citizens and businesses.

The panellists are Philip Thorsen (Partner at Mazanti-Andersen Korso Jensen, Copenhagen), Christopher Deacon (Partner at Stewart & Stewart, London) and Guido Callegari (Partner at De Berti Jacchia Franchini Forlani, Milan).

The discussion will be moderated by Diana Wallis (University of Hull, former President of the European Law Institute and former Vice-president of the European Parliament).

More details and advance registration here.

A quick note for archival purposes on the French Supreme Court judgment earlier this month in which it upheld the lower courts’ decision (which had been reversed upon appeal) that European Convention rights do not trump the impossibility under English law, which is the law under which the claimant had been adopted, for the adopted to confirm descent from both the adopted parents and the biological father.

It is important to keep in mind the specific circumstances of the case in which the Supreme Court let the stability of family relations prevail over ECHR rights. The adoption went back to 1966 (the UK birth to 1958). The true identity of the father seemingly had always been known to the applicant. The mother (1963) and the suspected biological father (2011)  have passed away, the real issue would seem to be inheritance related.

Geert.

Interesting French supreme court judgment upholding finding under applicable English law that descendance following adoption trumps later attempt to establish blood descendance
Preference for stability of family relations found not to infringe adopted's A8 #ECHR rights @ECHR_CEDH https://t.co/Gtht0d8YgH

— Geert Van Calster (@GAVClaw) October 15, 2020

Pourvoi c/ Premier président près la Cour d'appel de Bordeaux, 28 janvier 2020

Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel de Lyon, 5 mars 2020