This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
The court held that, under the disputed clause, only when the option holder chooses to take the proceedings in the designated court will that court have exclusive jurisdiction, but this does not exclude the right of the option holder to sue in other competent courts. [9] 18] In Picc Xiamen Branch v. KAMAT GmbH & Co.
By Zhengxin Huo, Professor of Law, China University of Polit’l Science and Law; Associate Member of International Academy of Comparative Law; Observer of the UNESCO 1970 Convention. The Court, thereafter, held the hearings on 26 July and 12 October of 2018 respectively, and publicly pronounced the judgement on 4 December 2020.
National civil procedurallaw is called upon to decide which third-country companies can be sued within the EU and how the Ingmar case law for EU domiciled companies will be further developed. This is a problem of uniformity – different national laws allow for different answers.
Ever since 2009, when the German choice-of-law provisions for contracts were removed and the Rome I Regulation with its carve-out for arbitration agreements entered into force, the choice of law for arbitration agreements has been debated in Germany. The court held that the enforcement provision Article V (1) lit.
Both the first instance court and the court in appeal found that the claims were sufficiently connected, despite the contentions of Shell. in the 2015 ruling). In the introduction we mentioned the English Supreme Courtruling in Okpaby v Shell [2021] UKSC 3 of February 2021. The Shell’s contentions were twofold.
„Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters: Explanatory Report“, as approved by the HCCH on 22 September 2020 (available here). Judgments Convention: Application to Governments”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 121-137.
„Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters: Explanatory Report“, as approved by the HCCH on 22 September 2020 (available here). Judgments Convention: Application to Governments”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 121-137. 187-214.
„Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters: Explanatory Report“, as approved by the HCCH on 22 September 2020 (available here). Judgments Convention: Application to Governments”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 121-137. 187-214.
„Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters: Explanatory Report“, as approved by the HCCH on 22 September 2020 (available here). Judgments Convention: Application to Governments”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 121-137.
„Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters: Explanatory Report“, as approved by the HCCH on 22 September 2020 (available here). Judgments Convention: Application to Governments”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 121-137.
„Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters: Explanatory Report“, as approved by the HCCH on 22 September 2020 (available here). Judgments Convention: Application to Governments”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 121-137.
„Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters: Explanatory Report“, as approved by the HCCH on 22 September 2020 (available here). Judgments Convention: Application to Governments”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 121-137.
„Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters: Explanatory Report“, as approved by the HCCH on 22 September 2020 (available here). Judgments Convention: Application to Governments”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 121-137.
The following article presents the German implementing rules for this recast. Magnus: A new Private International Law and new ProceduralRules for Adoptions in Germany. As a result of two recent reforms the German private international and procedurallaws applicable to adoptions have changed quite substantively.
Wagner: European Conflict of Law2020: EU in crisis mode! This article provides an overview of developments in Brussels in the field of judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters from December 2019 until December 2020. v OOO Insurance Company Chubb (Enka v Chubb).
79-109 (available here ) Amurodov, Jahongir “Some issues of Ratification of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters (2019) by the Republic of Uzbekistan”, Uzbek Law Review 2020-03, pp. University of Pittsburgh Law Review 82 (2021), pp. Fernández Arroyo (eds.),
79-109 (available here ) Amurodov, Jahongir “Some issues of Ratification of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters (2019) by the Republic of Uzbekistan”, Uzbek Law Review 2020-03, pp. University of Pittsburgh Law Review 82 (2021), pp. Fernández Arroyo (eds.),
79-109 (available here ) Amurodov, Jahongir “Some issues of Ratification of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters (2019) by the Republic of Uzbekistan”, Uzbek Law Review 2020-03, pp. University of Pittsburgh Law Review 82 (2021), pp. Fernández Arroyo (eds.),
In March 2020, citing the COVID-19 pandemic, the Trump administration relied on Title 42 to suspend the entry of migrants at the Mexico and Canada borders. The administrative stay means that the policy will not automatically terminate on Wednesday if the justices need more time to rule. The policy allowed U.S.
The ruling demonstrated a pragmatic approach rather than deferring to state courtproceduralrules, highlighting the court’s focus on minimizing unnecessary delays and costs. #2 Sonner sought restitution for a past harm but failed to demonstrate that she lacked an adequate remedy at law. 2 Sonner v.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content