Conflit de juridictions
Majeur protégé/Tutelle
Étranger
The official program for the November 2 event in Washington DC can be found here, as well as the online RSVP link.
The event will feature remarks by Dean William Treanor, Georgetown University Law Center, an Opening Presentation by Christophe Bernasconi, Secretary General, Hague Conference on Private International Law, and a Keynote speech by the Hon. Rimsky Yeun, Hong Kong Secretary of Justice. The day will also feature panels concerning the operation of the Conventions in theory And practice, the work of the national Central Authorities, comparative insights from both common law and civil law lawyers, and consideration of the critical challenges that will face the Conventions over the next half-century.
The conference will be held on the campus of Georgetown University Law Center, 600 New Jersey Ave., NW, Washington D.C., on the 12th floor of the Gewirz Building.
The sponsor of this event is the Center on Transnational Business and the Law, Georgetown University Law Center. The event is co-sponsored by the Hague Conference on Private International Law, the American Branch of the International Law Association, the American Society of International Law, the ABA Section of International Law and the International Law Institute. Contributing co-sponsors include: Covington & Burling LLP, Jones Day, and Winston & Strawn
The fourth edition of the EU-Zivilprozessrecht: EuZPR by Prof. Peter Schlosser and Prof. Burkhard Hess, updated and thoroughly reworked, has just been released.
The book is an answer to a well-known fact : in a ever-closer European Union mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments in the individual Member States is becoming increasingly important. In this very timely published, easy to handle commentary, the essential elements of the EU Zivilprozessrechts to date are comprehensively commented, with a look to the practice. The following instruments are to be found therein, annotated provision by provision: the Brussles I bis Regulation; the Regulation on the European enforcement order; the Regulation on the European order for payment; the small claims Regulation; the Regulation establishing a European Account Preservation Order procedure; the Regulation on the service of documents; the Regulation on the taking of evidence; the Hague Convention on the service of documents, as well as the one on the taking of evidence.
The book approach makes of it a very valuable tool for lawyers and notaries with an international-oriented practice, judges and other judicial authorities. Of course, also for academics.
Data sheet: in German; 623 pp. Format (B x L): 12,8 x 19,4 cm
ISBN 978-3-406-65845-7
For further information on the book and to order it on line click here.
Party Autonomy in European Private (and) International Law, vol. 1, a cura di Bettina Heiderhoff e Ilaria Queirolo, Aracne, 2015, vol. 1, pp. 308, ISBN: 9788854876958, Euro 20; vol. 2, a cura di Maria Elena De Maestri e Stefano Dominelli, Aracne , 2015, vol. 2, pp. 296, ISBN: 9788854876965, Euro 18.
[Dal sito dell’editore] – By bringing together PhD candidates from different EU Member States to attend four seminars of advanced learning in a Programme in European Private Law for Postgraduates (PEPP), the PEPP is playing an active role in moulding law practitioners and scholars with an international and comprehensive approach. This tome comprises contributions from PhD candidates who participated in the 2013-2014 PEPP Session (held in Münster, Wroclaw, Leuven and Imperia-Genoa). The works of the Authors focus on their own research topics, connected to contract law, international and EU commerce, private international law and the protection of human rights in the European Union.
Ulteriori informazioni, compresi gli indici dei due volumi, sono disponibili, rispettivamente, qui e qui.
Infliger une peine de prison à un sans-papiers, qui, après être retourné dans son pays dans le cadre d’une procédure de retour, est entré de nouveau irrégulièrement sur le territoire en violation d’une interdiction d’entrée, n’est pas contraire à la directive « retour ».
En carrousel matière: Non Matières OASIS: NéantPar un arrêt du 3 septembre 2015, la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne estime qu’une législation nationale peut, dans la mesure où celle-ci est nécessaire à la récupération des aides d’État incompatibles avec le marché de l’Union, se baser sur une réglementation européenne non en vigueur au moment de la constatation des faits.
En carrousel matière: Non Matières OASIS: NéantLa Corte d’Appello di Varsavia ha di recente sollecitato la Corte di Giustizia a chiarire in via pregiudiziale l’interpretazione del regolamento n. 2201/2003 concernente la competenza, il riconoscimento e l’esecuzione delle decisioni in materia matrimoniale e di responsabilità genitoriale (Bruxelles II bis).
Il procedimento pregiudiziale, iscritto nel ruolo della Corte come causa C-294/15 (Edyta Mikołajczyk c. Marie Louise Czarnecka e Stefan Czarnecki), interessa in modo specifico l’applicabilità (e, se del caso, l’applicazione) del regolamento a un giudizio di annullamento del matrimonio promosso da un soggetto estraneo alla coppia dopo la morte di uno dei coniugi.
Benché l’avviso pubblicato nella Gazzetta ufficiale dell’Unione europea non fornisca molti dettagli in merito alle circostanze del giudizio principale, è plausibile che, nella specie, il ricorrente abbia chiesto l’annullamento del matrimonio invocando l’esistenza di legami di sangue fra i coniugi o lo stato non libero di uno di essi (ringrazio Michał Wojewoda dell’Università di Łódź per avermi fornito una breve illustrazione delle norme polacche in tema di annullamento del matrimonio).
In sostanza, il giudice del rinvio chiede alla Corte di Giustizia di precisare se il regolamento Bruxelles II bis — che ai sensi dell’art. 1, par. 1, lett. a), si applica “al divorzio, alla separazione personale e all’annullamento del matrimonio” — includa nella propria sfera applicativa anche la particolare ipotesi di annullamento ora descritta.
Per il caso in cui la risposta sia affermativa, il giudice a quo chiede di sapere se nelle cause di annullamento che siano state promosse, come nella specie, da un soggetto diverso da uno dei coniugi, sia possibile fare riferimento, per quanto riguarda la giurisdizione, ai criteri contemplati dall’art. 3, par. 1, lett. a), quinto e sesto trattino, del regolamento, incentrati sulla residenza abituale dell’attore.
Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel de Douai, 2 avril 2015
Pourvoi c/ formation disciplinaire du Conseil de l'Ordre des avocats au Conseil d'État et à la Cour de cassation
Pourvoi c/ Cour d'appel d'Aix-en-Provence, 5eme chambre des appels correctionnels, 24 mars 2015
Cour d'appel de Colmar, Chambre de l'instruction, 24 septembre 2015
Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer