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
As a practical matter, he asked Suri, why is it inconvenient for the government to litigate in one circuit instead of another? Suri told the justices that this was not a question of convenience, but instead about Congresss choice in the statute to delineate where cases can be brought.
Written by Marco Farina, Italian lawyer, PhD in Civil ProceduralLaw at the University La Sapienza of Rome – Adjunct Professor of Civil ProceduralLaw at the University LUISS of Rome. This is not an alteration of the procedural equality of the parties.
As was briefly announced earlier on this blog , on 29 January 2021, the Dutch Court of Appeal in The Hague gave a ruling in a long-standing litigation launched by four Nigerian farmers and the Dutch Milieudefensie. Oil spill in Nigeria and litigation in The Hague courts. in the 2015 ruling). Introduction.
This article gives a glimpse of how Chinese courts handle asymmetric choice of court agreements in international and commercial civil litigations. [4] Characterization Chinese courts have demonstrated mainly four different views in characterizing asymmetric choice of court agreements. 5] In Hang Seng Bank Ltd.
The Jurisdiction of the Chinese Court: Prorogated Jurisdiction. Jurisdiction is the first issue that the Court had to consider when it dealt with the dispute. In international civil litigation, many cases involve a foreign defendant not domiciled or residing within China. Concluding Remarks.
First and second instance courts decided in favour of Z. the Supreme Courtruled that the Athens Court of Appeal failed to examine two grounds of appeal raised by M. The case was sent back to the appellate court [Supreme Court nr. After several years of litigation in both federal and state courts, Z.
Otherwise, the remaining option to seize a non-EU defendant in a Member State court is through submission by appearance according to Art. Whether strategic joint litigation can be brought against an EU anchor defendant in order to drag along a non-EU defendant depends upon the national provisions of the EU Member States.
The Court answered this question in the affirmative. The author analyses the background of the decision and discusses its consequences for the long-standing conflict of procedurallaws ( Justizkonflikt) between the United States and Germany. The article sheds some light on the newly fashioned sec.
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.
“A Guide to Global Private International Law”, Oxford 2022, forthcoming. Appraisal of the Success of the Instruments of International Commercial Arbitration vs. Litigation and Mediation in the Harmonization of the Rules of Transnational Commercial Dispute Settlement”, preprint (DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-953987/v1 rs-953987/v1 ).
“A Guide to Global Private International Law”, Oxford 2022, forthcoming. Appraisal of the Success of the Instruments of International Commercial Arbitration vs. Litigation and Mediation in the Harmonization of the Rules of Transnational Commercial Dispute Settlement”, preprint (DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-953987/v1 rs-953987/v1 ).
“A Guide to Global Private International Law”, Oxford 2022, forthcoming. Appraisal of the Success of the Instruments of International Commercial Arbitration vs. Litigation and Mediation in the Harmonization of the Rules of Transnational Commercial Dispute Settlement”, preprint (DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-953987/v1 rs-953987/v1 ).
“A Guide to Global Private International Law”, Oxford 2022, forthcoming. Appraisal of the Success of the Instruments of International Commercial Arbitration vs. Litigation and Mediation in the Harmonization of the Rules of Transnational Commercial Dispute Settlement”, preprint (DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-953987/v1 rs-953987/v1 ).
The FSIL’s reciprocity clause is consistent with the emphasis on reciprocity that one finds in other provisions of Chinese law. to Article 14(3) is significant because Chinese court decisions that recognize foreign judgments are considered “rulings.” This post is cross-posted at Transnational Litigation Blog.]
“A Guide to Global Private International Law”, Oxford 2022, forthcoming. Appraisal of the Success of the Instruments of International Commercial Arbitration vs. Litigation and Mediation in the Harmonization of the Rules of Transnational Commercial Dispute Settlement”, preprint (DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-953987/v1 rs-953987/v1 ).
“A Guide to Global Private International Law”, Oxford 2022, forthcoming. Appraisal of the Success of the Instruments of International Commercial Arbitration vs. Litigation and Mediation in the Harmonization of the Rules of Transnational Commercial Dispute Settlement”, preprint (DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-953987/v1 rs-953987/v1 ).
“A Guide to Global Private International Law”, Oxford 2022, forthcoming. Appraisal of the Success of the Instruments of International Commercial Arbitration vis-a-vis International Commercial Litigation and Mediation in the Harmonization of the Rules of Transnational Commercial Dispute Resolution”, Journal of Dispute Resolution 2022-02, pp.
“A Guide to Global Private International Law”, Oxford 2022, forthcoming. Appraisal of the Success of the Instruments of International Commercial Arbitration vs. Litigation and Mediation in the Harmonization of the Rules of Transnational Commercial Dispute Settlement”, preprint (DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-953987/v1 rs-953987/v1 ).
Breaking) News From The Hague: A Game Changer in International Litigation? 2020.001343 ) Conley, Anna “Comparing Essential Components of Transnational Jurisdiction: A Proposed Comparative Methodology”, Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law” 31 (2023), pp. EU Civil ProcedureLaw and Third Countries – Which Way Forward?,
Breaking) News From The Hague: A Game Changer in International Litigation? 110-127 (available here) Cui, Zhenghao “On the Coordination between the Draft Convention on Judicial Sale of Ships and the related Conventions of the Hague Conference on Private International Law”, China Ship Survey 2021-04, pp. 187-214 Coco, Sarah E.
Breaking) News From The Hague: A Game Changer in International Litigation? 110-127 (available here) Cui, Zhenghao “On the Coordination between the Draft Convention on Judicial Sale of Ships and the related Conventions of the Hague Conference on Private International Law”, China Ship Survey 2021-04, pp. 187-214 Coco, Sarah E.
Climate litigation in Germany has achieved another major victory. On November 30, 2023, the Higher Administrative Court Berlin-Brandenburg ruled in DUH and BUND v. Against this backdrop, the decision of the Higher Administrative Court must also be understood as part of a new wave of climate litigation.
In doing so, he writes, the state court applied that law “essentially verbatim” in its opinion, without referring to federal law. Glossip counters that there is a “high hurdle” to overcome the presumption that the Supreme Court can review a state courtruling on an issue of federal law.
Facing the termination of the policy on Wednesday under Sullivan’s order, the states asked the justices to step in on an emergency basis and block that order from taking effect, which would effectively keep the Title 42 policy in place while litigation continues.
Sonner sought restitution for a past harm but failed to demonstrate that she lacked an adequate remedy at law. The issue was whether federal courts can award equitable relief when state law permits it, but an adequate legal remedy exists. Decision The courtruled in favor of Bachmann, granting her qualified immunity.
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