Agrégateur de flux

Article 706-154 du code de procédure pénale

Cour de cassation française - mar, 07/16/2019 - 16:37

Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel de Paris, chambre de l'instruction, 14 février 2019

Catégories: Flux français

Articles 706-141-1 du code de procédure pénale et 131-21, alinéa 9, du code pénal

Cour de cassation française - mar, 07/16/2019 - 16:37

Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel de Paris, chambre de l'instruction, 14 février 2019

Catégories: Flux français

Articles L. 1235-7-1 et L. 1233-57-5 du code du travail

Cour de cassation française - mar, 07/16/2019 - 16:37

Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel de Paris, 2e chambre, 31 janvier 2019

Catégories: Flux français

Article L. 8271-6-1, alinéa 1, du code du travail dans sa version antérieure à la loi n° 2016-731 du 3 juin 2016

Cour de cassation française - mar, 07/16/2019 - 16:37

Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel de Reims, chambre correctionnelle, 20 novembre 2018

Catégories: Flux français

Article L. 111-1-3 du code des procédures civiles d'exécution

Cour de cassation française - mar, 07/16/2019 - 16:37

Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel de Paris, chambre 4-8, 6 septembre 2018

Catégories: Flux français

Internships available: The HCCH now accepts applications

Conflictoflaws - mar, 07/16/2019 - 09:59

The Permanent Bureau of the Hague Conference on Private International (HCCH) seeks high-achieving interns for January to July 2020.

An internship with the HCCH offers a unique opportunity to deepen the knowledge of private international law, better understand how the HCCH functions, and contribute to the work of the Organisation.

Interested? Then lodge your application by Monday 30 September 2019.

For more information, including the application requirements, check out the HCCH website at: https://www.hcch.net/en/recruitment/internships#legal.

Procédure applicable aux mineurs : des rappels bienvenus

Par trois arrêts rendus le même jour, la chambre criminelle apporte d’utiles précisions relatives à la procédure applicable aux mineurs.

en lire plus

Catégories: Flux français

Articles L.97, L.117 du code électoral, 131-26 et 131-26-1 du code pénal et L.48-2 et LO 136-3 du code électoral

Cour de cassation française - lun, 07/15/2019 - 13:27

Tribunal de grande instance de Besançon, chambre correctionnelle, 26 juin 2019

Catégories: Flux français

Article L 731-10-1, alinéa 2, du code rural et de la pêche maritime

Cour de cassation française - lun, 07/15/2019 - 13:27

Tribunal de grande instance de Marseille, 21 juin 2019

Catégories: Flux français

Articles L. 335-2, L. 335-3 et L. 716-10 du code de la propriété intellectuelle

Cour de cassation française - lun, 07/15/2019 - 13:27

Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel de Paris - chambre 5-14, 12 février 2019

Catégories: Flux français

Reitbauer: contract, pauliana and exclusive jurisdictional rules. CJEU simply applies Feniks, its forum contractus view remains unconvincing.

GAVC - lun, 07/15/2019 - 08:08

I reviewed Tanchev AG’s Opinion in C‑722/17 Reitbauer here. Readers best refer to it to get insight into the complex factual matrix. The CJEU held on Wednesday last week- no English version of the judgment is as yet available.

In essence applicants are attempting to anchor their pauliana unto A24(5)’s enforcement jurisdiction. Failing that, the anchor might be A24(1)’s locus rei sitae exclusive jurisdictional rule.

The Court like the AG rejects jurisdiction on the basis of Article 24(5). They are right: A25(5) must not resurrect merits claims on much wider issues (claim for compensation of applicants’ debt, objections concerning the non-existence of a claim underlying a judicially ordered auction, and concerning the invalidity of the creation of the pledge for that claim under a loan agreement).

Court and AG are also right in rejecting Article 24(1) jurisdiction. The issues at stake are far removed from the reasons which justify exclusive jurisdiction. (The Court refers to Komu, Schmidt, Weber).

Then, surprisingly (for it was not part of the questions asked; the AG entertained it but that is what AGs do) the Court completes the analysis proprio motu with consideration of Article 7(1)’s forum contractus rule, with respect to claimants’ argument that the acknowledgement of debt by Isabel, cannot be used against them. Tanchev AG as I noted essentially suggested a limitation of Feniks to cases of fraus – arguably present here. At 59-60 the Court simply notes that all creditors were ‘contractually’ linked to Isabel C, and then applies Feniks to come to a finding of contractual relation between claimants and Mr Casamassima: without any reference to the fraus element (I had indeed suspected the Court would not so quickly vary its own case-law).

The AG did not discuss the place of performance of the contract (between Reitbauer et al and Mr Casamassima – this was exactly one of the sticky points signalled by Bobek AG in Feniks). The CJEU however does, and at 61 simply identifies that as the place where the underlying contract, between Isabel C and the building contractors, had to be performed: that is, the place of the renovation works in Austria.

That an Article 7(1) forum was answered at all, is surprising. That the place of performance of that contract is straightforwardly assimilated with the underlying contractual arrangement, is not necessarily convincing. That Feniks would not so soon be varied (if at all), was to be expected.

Forum contractus is surely stretching to forum abundantum.

Geert.

(Handbook of) EU Private International Law, 2nd ed. 2016, Chapter 2, Heading 2.2.11.1

Le gouvernement doit revoir sa copie sur l’accès aux professions de conducteur de taxi et de VTC

La réglementation sur les examens d’accès aux professions de conducteur de taxi et de VTC ne respecte pas la liberté d’établissement. Dans l’attente de sa modification, le gouvernement doit continuer à organiser ces examens.

en lire plus

Catégories: Flux français

Pages

Sites de l’Union Européenne

 

Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer