Agrégateur de flux

Article L. 116-4 du code de l'action sociale et des familles

Cour de cassation française - lun, 10/19/2020 - 16:18

Tribunal judiciaire de Toulouse, 30 septembre 2020

Catégories: Flux français

R. Brand on Provisional Measures in Aid of Arbitration

Conflictoflaws - lun, 10/19/2020 - 14:02

The success of the New York Convention has made arbitration a preferred means of dispute resolution for international commercial transactions. Success in arbitration often depends on the extent to which a party may, in advance, ensure that assets or evidence is secured in advance, or that the other party is required to take steps to secure the status quo. This makes the availability of provisional measures granted by either arbitral tribunals or by courts important to the arbitration process. In this chapter, Ron Brand of the University of Pittsburgh School of Law considers the existing legal framework for such provisional measures in aid of arbitration, giving particular attention to the source of the rules that might govern such relief related to international commercial transactions and the arbitration of disputes they may generate. These include the New York Convention, the applicable lex arbitri, institutional arbitration rules, and the arbitration contract. He considers how these sources do or do not provide a comprehensive and coherent framework for effective dispute resolution – including especially the effective satisfaction of any resulting arbitral award – and some of the ways in which the arbitration clause may be drafted to specifically take into account the often unanticipated, but always possible, need for provisional measures.

TThe article is accessible here

Singer on Choice of Law (in the US)

EAPIL blog - lun, 10/19/2020 - 14:00

Joseph William Singer (Harvard Law School) has published a new casebook on the American Conflict of Laws (Choice of Law – Patterns, Arguments, Practices). As its titles makes clear, its focus is on choice of law, but the book also includes two chapters on Procedure and Constitutional Law which present issues related to jurisdiction and foreign judgments.

The book is different from other American casebooks on conflict of laws in many respects. For foreign scholars, the most important will probably be that it is far more readable and accessible. US casebooks typically offer extracts of cases followed by questions. This might be good to teach American students to think like a lawyer, but for those who will not attend the class, it is not easy to know what American law actually is. Singer summarises the cases instead, and offers comments and his own views on the development of the law.

In particular, the book is a great source on the trends of the emerging Third Restatement, that Singer presents and assesses. The Restatement is still very much a work in progress, but some chapters have now been approved by the council of the American Law Institute, in particular on choice of law and torts, and the drafts are not freely available. The book offers an excellent insight in the most recent version of December 2019, in particular the new choice of law rules on torts.

The book also promotes a different type of learning. More specifically, it promotes experiential learning through persuasion, and includes for that purpose 11 moot courts exercises.

This book provides a new way to learn about the topic of conflicts of law through experiential learning. Most books describe the approaches that have been adopted over time to decide conflicts of laws. This book describes those approaches and includes the emerging Third Restatement. To promote experiential learning, it does more: First, it explains patterns of cases so that students can fit new cases into established frames of reference. Second, it distinguishes between easy cases and hard cases so students can determine when a case cannot be easily resolved. Third, it provides detailed arguments that are typically made on both sides of hard cases that fit the typical patterns. Fourth, it concludes with moot court exercises that students could perform in class to practice advocacy in this field and judging.

With new requirements to provide students with experiential learning opportunities, this text enables any teacher to give students the tools they need to understand the issues in the field, the reasons why cases are hard, the arguments that are available on both sides, and justifications that judges can give for resolving cases one way or the other.

Finally, the book ends with a chapter addressing the issues arising out of the existence of Indian nations and tribal sovereignty in the US, which add 573 governments in the conflicts equation, and are typically neglected in US conflicts books.

Articles 138 et 142 du code de procédure pénale

Cour de cassation française - lun, 10/19/2020 - 13:18

Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel d'Aix-En-Provence, 29 juillet 2020

Catégories: Flux français

Article 367 du code de procédure pénale

Cour de cassation française - lun, 10/19/2020 - 13:18

Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel de Paris, 17 août 2020

Catégories: Flux français

Article 706-3 du code de procédure pénale

Cour de cassation française - lun, 10/19/2020 - 13:18

Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel de Poitiers, 7 avril 2020

Catégories: Flux français

Articles 793 et 793 bis du code général des impôts

Cour de cassation française - lun, 10/19/2020 - 13:18

Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel de Grenoble, 26 novembre 2019

Catégories: Flux français

Articles 222-48 et 222-64 du code pénal

Cour de cassation française - lun, 10/19/2020 - 13:18

Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel de Nîmes

Catégories: Flux français

The Final PSEFS Project Event on 20 & 21 October 2020

Conflictoflaws - lun, 10/19/2020 - 11:03

We have already reported on PSEFS, that stands for “Personalized Solution in European Family and Succession Law”, a co-funded EU Justice project, on two occasions: here and here.

On Tuesday 20 & Wednesday 21 October 2020 the project leader University of Camerino and its partners are organising the Final PSEFS Project Events to disseminate at the project results and discuss the pressing issues in the area of cross-border implications of couples’ property and succession. Rich programme includes many speakers from justice and academia. The event will take place online and participation is free of charge while registration is mandatory – here.

Most recent project outcomes include:
handbook available in 5 languages: M.J. Cazorla González, M. Giobbi, J. Kramberger Škerl, L. Ruggeri & S. Winkler (eds.), Property Relations of Cross-Border Couples in the European Union, Napoli, Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane, 2020.
model documents and guidelines for practitioners in 5 languages: M.J. Cazorla González, L. Ruggeri (eds.), Guidelines for practitioners in cross-border family property and succession law (A collection of model acts accompanied by comments and guidelines for their drafting), Dykinson, 2020.
Both are available via this link at the bottom of the page.

Transboundary Environmental Pollution in PIL from a Comparative Perspective

Conflictoflaws - lun, 10/19/2020 - 10:54

Guillaume Laganière has published his doctoral thesis (McGill University, May 2020) “Liability for transboundary pollution in private international law: a duty to ensure prompt and adequate compensation” online here. Because of the author’s comparative approach to the topic, the work is not only interesting to Canadian readers. The abstract reads as follows:

 

Our legal response to transboundary pollution depends not only on the adoption of preventive measures and regulatory oversight but also on the existence of civil liability mechanisms. Victims fundamentally seek to hold polluters liable for breaching their duties or deviating from basic standards of diligence, to obtain redress for the damage that ensued and to prevent it from continuing. The process becomes difficult, however, when pollution crosses borders and several domestic regimes are involved. This is where private international law comes into play.

This thesis investigates the regulatory function of private international law with respect to transboundary pollution. It uses the International Law Commission’s Principles on the Allocation of Loss in the Case of Transboundary Harm as a benchmark and assesses Canadian private international law accordingly. It suggests that states have a duty to ensure the availability of prompt and adequate compensation for all victims of transboundary pollution (local or foreign). States must implement domestic measures to facilitate claims against transboundary polluters. This includes equal access to justice and equal remedies for all victims. Private international law plays a crucial role in this context: courts must have jurisdiction to hear cross-border claims and apply a law that is favourable to compensation under choice of law rules.

This thesis builds from international environmental law to identify preferable rules of jurisdiction and choice of law for transboundary pollution in the Canadian context. It also addresses the enforcement of foreign judgments against local polluters. The conclusions of this thesis have implications for all cross-border environmental litigation, including climate change litigation against greenhouse gas emitters currently unfolding in domestic courts around the world.

Greek Commentary on the Brussels I bis Regulation

EAPIL blog - lun, 10/19/2020 - 08:00

A new commentary on the Brussels I bis Regulation, in Greek, has recently been published.

The book is edited by Paris S. Arvanitakis and Evangelos Vassilakakis, and forms part of a series devoted to the ‘Interpretation of European Regulations on Private and Procedural International Law’. The previous volumes in the series cover the Brussels II bis Regulation (2016), the Service Regulation (2018), and the Small Claims Regulation (2019) Regulations. Commentaries on the Succession and Maintenance Regulations are scheduled for publication in the near future.

Academics, judges and other practitioners contributed to the commentary to the Brussels I bis Regulation, including Eyangelos Vasilakakis, Paris S. ArvanitakisApostolos M. AnthimosPanagiotis S. GiannopoulosIoannis S. DelikostopoulosStefania Kapaktsi, Vasileios Kourtis, Dimitrios Kranis, Salomi MouzouraKyriakos OikonomouIoannis Revolidis, Konstantinos Ir. RigasChristos TriantafyllidisAntonios D. TsavdaridisSofia Fourlari and Christina Chatzidandi.

More info available here (in Greek).

EAPIL Webinar on International Property Law – Final Programme and Practical Details

EAPIL blog - dim, 10/18/2020 - 14:00

As announced earlier on this blog, the Working Group on International Property Law will hold a webinar on the suitability and feasibility of a European Regulation on International Property Law via Zoom on Tuesday, 20 October 2020 at 12:30 CEST.

The current members of the Working Group will shortly discuss the various facets of the topic. A discussion will follow, open to participants.

The programme of the webinar is as follwos:

  • Teun Struycken (Amsterdam/Utrecht): The Significance of International Property Law (case study)
  • Teemu Juutilainen (Turku): The Impact of Free Movement of Goods and Services on International Property Law
  • Gilles Cuniberti (Luxembourg): The Impact of the Acquis Communautaire on International Property Law
  • Janeen M Carruthers (Glasgow): Global Measures for the Unification of Private International Rules pertaining to Property
  • Eva-Maria Kieninger (Würzburg): The Way Ahead: Topics and Goals of the Working Group

Use this link to attend the webinar (meeting ID: 722 581 7358; password is 493028).

Universal Civil Jurisdiction – Which Way Forward?

Conflictoflaws - sam, 10/17/2020 - 12:11

Serena Forlati and Pietro Franzina edited a book on the Universal Civil Jurisdiction, which was published by Brill a couple of days ago. The book features contributions prepared by colleagues  from four different European countries and eight universities.

The contributions included are the following:

  • ‘The Case of Naït-Liman before the European Court of Human Rights – A Forum Non Conveniens for Asserting the Right of Access to a Court in Relation to Civil Claims for Torture Committed Abroad?’ (Andrea Saccucci, University of Campania);

 

  • ‘The Role of the European Court of Human Rights in the Development of Rules on Universal Civil Jurisdiction – Naït-Liman v Switzerland in the Transition between the Chamber and the Grand Chamber’ (Serena Forlati, University of Ferrara);

 

  • ‘The Interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights – Lessons from the Naït-Liman Case’ (Malgosia Fitzmaurice, Queen Mary University);

 

  • ‘Public International Law Constraints on the Exercise of Adjudicatory Jurisdiction in Civil Matters’ (Lucas Roorda and Cedric Ryngaert, University of Utrecht);

 

  • ‘Universal Civil Jurisdiction and Reparation for International Crimes’ (Beatrice I. Bonafè, University of Rome La Sapienza);

 

  • ‘Limitations to the Exercise of Civil Jurisdiction in Areas Other Than Reparation for International Crimes’ (Fabrizio Marongiu Buonaiuti, University of Macerata);

 

  • ‘Residual Jurisdiction under the Brussels I bis Regulation – An Unexpected Avenue to Address Extraterritorial Corporate Human Rights Violations (Mariangela La Manna, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Milan);

 

  • ‘The Law Applicable to the Civil Consequences of Human Rights Violations Committed Abroad’ (Patrick Kinsch, University of Luxembourg);

 

  • ‘The Changing Face of Adjudicatory Jurisdiction’ (Pietro Franzina, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Milan).

More info available here.

Corrigendum to Brussels I bis in some linguistic versions

European Civil Justice - sam, 10/17/2020 - 00:50

A corrigendum to Brussels I bis in some linguistic versions has been published yesterday (15 October 2020) in the OJEU (L 338). It relates to the Czech, French and Polish versions of the Regulation. Here is the French version:

« Page 23, article 34, paragraphe 1, point c):

au lieu de: «c) la juridiction de l’État tiers concernée est convaincue que le sursis à statuer est nécessaire pour une bonne administration de la justice.»

lire: «c) la juridiction de l’État membre est convaincue que le sursis à statuer est nécessaire pour une bonne administration de la justice ».

It is an alignment with other linguistic versions.

Source : https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/FR/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2020.338.01.0013.01.FRA&toc=OJ:L:2020:338:TOC

Pages

Sites de l’Union Européenne

 

Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer