Agrégateur de flux

Delvigne
Citoyenneté européenne
Un État membre peut maintenir une interdiction de vote d’une durée indéfinie aux élections du Parlement européen pour certains de ses ressortissants

FC Dynamo-Minsk / Conseil
Relations extérieures
Le Tribunal annule la majorité des actes par lesquels le Conseil a gelé les fonds du club de football « Dynamo-Minsk »

Commission / Royaume-Uni
Sécurité sociale des travailleurs migrants
L’avocat général Pedro Cruz Villalón propose de rejeter le recours de la Commission contre le Royaume-Uni en matière d’allocations familiales

Schrems
Rapprochement des législations
La Cour déclare invalide la décision de la Commission constatant que les États-Unis assurent un niveau de protection adéquat aux données à caractère personnel transférées

La 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

Case-law on Rome II (the law applicable to non-contractual obligations) is only slowly picking up so almost anything coming out of the CJEU is met with excitement. Like Ergo Insurance (so far only the AG’s Opinion), Prüller-Frey concerns insurance contracts. In this case, direct action against an insurer, by the victim of an air traffic accident.

The victim sues in Austria, on the basis of Article 6 or, alternatively, 11 of the Brussels I Regulation (old: Regulation 44/2001). Applicability or not of the Montreal Convention (for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air) and the EU’s implementation of same, is less relevant for this posting. At stake was mostly Article 18 of the Rome II Regulation, which reads

The person having suffered damage may bring his or her claim directly against the insurer of the person liable to provide compensation if the law applicable to the non-contractual obligation or the law applicable to the insurance contract so provides.

The lex contractus is German law. This was so chosen by the insured, Norbert Brodnig, and the insurance company, Axa Versicherung AG. German law does not provide for such direct action. But Spanish law, the lex locus damni (which applies between Prüller-Frey and Brodnig), does. The insurance company calls upon the absence of the action in German law, to reject Prüller-Frey’s action. Szpunar AG and the CJEU itself simply point to the clear language of Article 18: this is not a conflict of laws rule that determines the law applicable between victim and insurer: the insurance company’s obligations will continue to be subject to the lex contractus. Article 18 is simply an alternative connecting factor for the very possibility of direct action against the insurer. Spanish law is the law applicable to the non-contractual obligation and if Spanish law allows for such direct action, then that is enough for there to be one.

Geert.

Renouvellement partiel de la Cour de justice et entrée en fonction d’un nouveau Membre au Tribunal de l’UE

Last Thursday (1 October 2015), the Convention of 30 June 2005 on Choice of Court Agreements (the Convention) entered into force in 28 States (Mexico and all Members of the European Union, except Denmark). This results from Mexico’s accession to the Convention in 2007 and the recent approval of the Convention by the European Union. This momentum is set to encourage other States currently considering becoming a party to the Convention.

The Convention has been designed to provide more legal certainty and predictability in relation to choice of court agreements between parties to international commercial contracts. It ensures three things: a court chosen by the parties must, in principle, hear the case; any other court before which proceedings are brought must refuse to hear them; and the judgment rendered by the chosen court must be recognised and enforced in other Contracting States.

As consistently recognised by judges, practitioners and other key players within the international legal community, the application of the Convention will deliver adequate responses to the increasingly pressing need in international transactions for enforceable choice of court agreements and their resulting judgments.

For further information on the Convention click here.

Recent comments on the entering into force by Prof. Pedro de Miguel (Universidad Complutense, Madrid) can be seen here.

Nigel Blackaby, Constantine Partasides, Alan Redfern, Martin Hunter, Redfern and Hunter on International Arbitration, 6a ed., Oxford University Press, 2015, pp. 944, ISBN 9780198744870, GBP 175.

[Dal sito dell’editore] This leading commentary on international commercial arbitration, now in its sixth edition, is an essential guide for arbitrators and lawyers worldwide. Based on the authors’ extensive experience as counsel and arbitrators, it provides an updated explanation of all elements of the law and practice of arbitration. This pack includes the hardback and an ebook version. This text provides an authoritative guide to the international arbitral process, from the drafting of the arbitration agreement to the enforcement of arbitral awards. The sixth edition has been updated to incorporate reference to the latest significant developments in the field such as the new LCIA, ICC and UNCITRAL Rules and new IBA Guidelines. There will also be an increased reference to international arbitral authority and practice from beyond Europe (China, India, and the US). Following the chronology of an arbitration, the book covers applicable laws, arbitration agreements, the establishment and powers of a tribunal, the conduct of proceedings and the role of domestic courts. In addition, it provides an in-depth examination of the award itself, and comments on the special considerations applying to arbitrations brought under investment treaties. It draws on examples of the rules and practice of arbitration at the International Chamber of Commerce, the London Court of International Arbitration, the American Arbitration Association, the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes and the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law.

Maggiori informazioni a questo indirizzo.

Selon le règlement n° 1393/2007, l’entité requise est tenue d’informer le destinataire d’un acte de son droit de refuser la réception de celui-ci, en utilisant systématiquement à cet effet le formulaire type figurant à l’annexe II du règlement.

En carrousel matière:  Non Matières OASIS:  Procédure civile - Principe directeurs

en lire plus

Les trois institutions représentatives de la profession d’avocat ont formé un recours pour excès de pouvoir contre l’ordonnance du 23 juillet 2015 relative aux marchés publics, critiquant la transposition infidèle des directives européennes en la matière.

En carrousel matière:  Oui Matières OASIS:  Néant

en lire plus

La Cour européenne des droits de l’homme (CEDH) a élu le 21 septembre 2015, son nouveau président, deux vice-présidents et deux présidentes de section.

Le juge luxembourgeois Dean Spielmann atteignant la fin de son mandat présidentiel le 31 octobre 2015 laissera place au juge italien Guido Raimondi qui prendra ses fonctions de nouveau président de la Cour le 1er novembre prochain. Ce haut magistrat, juge à la CEDH depuis 2010, vice-président et président de section depuis 2012, a été élu par ses membres à bulletin secret et en session plénière pour un mandat de trois ans.

En carrousel matière:  Non Matières OASIS:  Néant

en lire plus