The new 2007 Lugano Convention, establishing parallelism with the Brussels I Regulation (Reg. 44/2001), had just entered into force in Switzerland in 2010 when it faced a new challenge in the form of the Recast Regulation (Reg. 1215/2012). Therefore, in 2014, CIVPRO (University of Bern), CCR (University of Luzern) and the Swiss Institute for Comparative Law (Lausanne) invited professors, researchers, civil officers and practitioners from all over Europe to discuss the future of European civil procedure with a special focus on Lugano and third states. Alexander Markus (Bern), Andreas Furrer (Luzern) and Ilaria Pretelli (Lausanne) have now published the (English/German) volume containing the keynote speeches and the subsequent contributions to this conference as well as the reports on the discussion in the various panels. This book presents and analyzes the past, the present and the alternative conceivable futures of the Lugano model of a “parallel” convention. For further information, click here.
Cour d'appel de Paris, pôle 4, chambre 7, 26 mai 2016
Institute of Cetacean Research v. Sea Shepherd Conservation Society has recently come to my attention thanks to Juliett Hatchett over at Baker: her analysis is spot on and I am happy to refer to it. She summarises the case as the district court confirming that perpetrating and funding piracy and unsafe navigation are within the scope of ATS jurisdiction, but holding that there is no enforceable international norm against whaling or financing terrorism.
The case is not easy to find however Sea Shepherd tend to link to court documents in their updates on the litigation.
I flag the case mainly to bring it to readers’ attention that CSR litigation can be done proactively: one need not wait for alleged violations of relevant legal standards to seek to seize a court. Exactly a point I assessed in the context of vulture fund litigation, end of May. (And in forthcoming paper).
Geert.
Jean-Jacques Urvoas, garde des Sceaux depuis le 27 janvier 2016 n’avait pas encore fait connaître aux parquets ses orientations de politique pénale ; c’est désormais fait.
Le 17 mai 2016, la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme (CEDH) se prononce en grande chambre, pour la première fois, sur la compatibilité de la liberté d’expression avec des mesures disciplinaires infligées à des parlementaires sur la manière dont ils se sont exprimés devant l’Assemblée.
Irrecevabilité
Irrecevabilité
Irrecevabilité
Clayton P. Gillette, Advanced Introduction to International Sales Law, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2016, ISBN 9781784711870, pp. 160, GBP 58,50.
[Dal sito dell’editore] – Providing a concise overview of the basic doctrines underlying the UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), Clayton Gillette explores their ambiguities and thus considers the extent to which uniform international commercial law is possible, as well as appraising the extent to which the doctrines in the UN Convention reflect those that commercial parties would prefer. With its compelling combination of doctrine and theory, this book makes an ideal companion for students and legal scholars alike.
Ulteriori informazioni sono disponibili a questo indirizzo.
Par un arrêt rendu le 10 mai 2016, le Tribunal de l’Union rejette le recours visant à annuler la décision de la Commission européenne refusant l’enregistrement d’une initiative citoyenne européenne (ICE) intitulée « Politique de cohésion pour l’égalité des régions et le maintien des cultures régionales ».
Irrecevabilité
Irrecevabilité
Irrecevabilité
Irrecevabilité
Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer