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
by Salih Okur (University of Augsburg) On 8 and 9 March, scholars from more than a dozen different jurisdictions followed the invitation of Tobias Lutzi to discuss recent trends in punitivedamages at the University of Augsburg, Germany. Rademacher then analysed whether punitive elements could be found in German tort law.
Connecticut Judge Barbara Bellis Thursday ruled that conspiracy theorist Alex Jones must pay $473 million in punitivedamages on top of a nearly $1 billion verdict handed down last month, for his defamatory statements about the 2012 Sandy Hook mass shooting.
The description of the book reads as follows: Thus far, private international law issues relating to punitivedamages have mainly been dealt with from the perspective of several European countries. Systematic research into countries outside Europe was lacking up until now.
Mainland-Hong Kong Choice of Court Arrangement stipulates that, according to the law of the requested party, if the requested court has exclusive jurisdiction over the case, it shall not recognize and enforce it, that is, adopt the “exclusive jurisdiction exclusion” model.
On one hand, as a conference summary is not legally binding, the courts cannot invoke it as the legal basis in judgments, but on the other hand, the courts can make the reasoning on the application of law according to the conference summary in the “Court Opinion” part.
We know this because when we receive their awards we see their experience through and the quality of their analysis of the case and application of the law. Remember, these are cases that could involve parties from common law and civillaw countries. An arbitration or mediation does not happen in a vacuum.
From 2 to 6 December 2024, the second edition of The Hague Academy of International Laws Advanced Course in Hong Kong was held, co-organised by the Asian Academy of International Law (AAIL) with the support of the Department of Justice of the Government of the Hong Kong SAR. 7 (1) lit. 2 HCCH 1958 until Art.
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