
Geneva Internet Dispute Resolution Policies (GIDRP) is a project of the University of Geneva, which looks into selected legal topics relating to internet disputes and puts forward policy proposals. So far, their expert team has developed the GIDRP 1.0 where one of the topics is particularly relevant for this blog readers (Topic 1: Which national courts shall have jurisdiction in internet-related disputes?). The website is inviting online endorsements and comments. Besides, interested experts are welcome to join the project in the development of the GIDRP 2.0. They may be contacted by e-mail: gidpr@unige.ch.
The relating document is available here.
Rome I Regulation – Commentary, edited by / a cura di Ulrich Magnus, perte Mankowski, Otto Schmidt Verlag, 2017, ISBN 9783504080068, pp. 928, EUR 229.
One of the great steps towards a European Private International Law and for the facilitation of transborder trade is the Rome I Regulation which europeanised the applicable law for international contracts throughout the Union (though except Denmark). This Regulation has to be applied since the end of 2009. It has moderately reformed and replaced the former Rome Convention which had already proven its practical value for over two decades as many national decisions and also judgments of the European Court of Justice evidence. It is therefore high time for a truly pan-European Commentary on the Rome I Regulation which takes account of the European nature of this instrument. This is reflected by the team of contributors that originates from all over Europe assembling first experts in their countries. The editors are Ulrich Magnus and Peter Mankowski who have already edited the well-received pan-European Commentaries on the Brussels I Regulation and the Brussels IIbis Regulation. The Commentary (in English) provides a thorough article-by-article analysis which intensely uses the rich case law and doctrine and suggests clear and practical solutions for disputed issues. It gives a comprehensive and actual account of the present state of the European international contract law. For international lawyers, practitioners as well as academics, it is an indispensable must.
Authors include: Andrea Bonomi, Alfonso-Luis Calvo Caravaca, Javier Carrascosa Gonzalez, Richard G. Fentiman, Franco Ferrari, Francisco Garcimartín Alférez, Helmut Heiss, Luís Pietro Rocha de Lima Pinheiro, Ulrich Magnus, Peter Mankowski, Guillermo Palao Moreno, Ilaria Queirolo, Bea Verschraegen, Michael Wilderspin, M.H. (Mathijs) ten Wolde.
Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel de Paris, pôle 2, chambre 11, 28 octobre 2015
Tribunal de grande instance de Nancy, 9 décembre 2016
Pourvoi c/ Cour d'assises du Var, 19 mai 2016
Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel de Paris, pôle 4, chambre 3, 14 avril 2016
Our children often hug me goodnight while I am working away at a brief or sitting next to a huge pile of exam papers, waiting to be marked. And especially in the latter case, I confess this is often accompanied by a pint of ale. My youngest daughter the other day told me she had had a dream that night in which I had found a cure for all cancers.
This was the modus operandi: I had spilt said beer (in said daughter’s dream) over the exam papers and by some interaction between beer and paper, the cure had come to me. Eureka! Somehow I have always known beer will save the world…
A warming thought for this chilly season. And one to lift our spirits, hoping for a less challenging 2017.
Enjoy your undoubtedly deserved breaks. Geert.
L’ordonnance du juge des libertés et de la détention (JLD) qui autorise une perquisition sans l’assentiment de la personne chez qui elle a lieu doit être motivée de façon adaptée et circonstanciée. Tel n’est pas le cas si elle se borne à se référer à la requête présentée par le parquet.
Le 21 juin 2016, la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme (CEDH) avait conclu, par quatre voix contre trois, à la non-violation de l’article 6, § 1 (droit d’accès à un tribunal), de la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme concernant tant l’action dirigée contre la Tunisie que l’action dirigée contre le ministre tunisien de l’intérieur. La CEDH avait estimé en particulier que le rejet des tribunaux suisses de leur compétence pour juger l’action civile de M.
Durant les vacances parlementaires et judiciaires, la rédaction de Dalloz actualité et d’Actuel avocat prend ses quartiers d’hiver pendant quelques jours. Les éditions quotidiennes seront interrompues le 23 décembre 2016 et reprendront le 2 janvier 2017.
D’ici là, n’hésitez pas à nous soumettre vos idées et vos commentaires.
Nous vous souhaitons de joyeuses fêtes de fin d’année. Nous vous remercions de votre fidélité et de vos lectures attentives.
Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer