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
Meng Yu, lecturer at China University of Political Science and Law, and co-founder of China Justice Observer. ABSTRACT In around 2019, a Chinese court in Hebei Province refused to enforce a US default monetary judgment from a California court on the grounds that a valid arbitration agreement was in place ( Sunvalley Solar Inc.
Share At oral arguments earlier this week the Supreme Court was skeptical of the Food and Drug Administrations effort to block a North Carolina-based company from challenging the denial of its application to market e-cigarettes in the conservative U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, based in Louisiana.
Introduction An asymmetric choice of court agreement is commonly used in international commercial transactions, especially in financial agreements, which usually allows one party (option holder) an optional choice about the forum in which proceedings may be brought but the other (non-option holder) an exclusive choice to sue in a designated court.
On November 30, 2023, the Higher Administrative Court Berlin-Brandenburg ruled in DUH and BUND v. Unlike in the 2021 landmark ruling in Neubauer et al. Germany of the Federal Constitutional Court, the focus of the decision is not on fundamental rights, but on administrative questions of climate governance and enforcement.
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. Introduction.
The EU Sustainability Directive and Jurisdiction The Draft for a Corporate Sustainable Due Diligence Directive currently contains no rules on jurisdiction. Instead, we address a gap in the Draft Directive, namely the lack of any provisions on jurisdiction.
This also applies to the extended possibility of choice of court agreements, for which it is still unclear whether exclusive prorogation is possible beyond the cases named in Article 10 section 4 of the Brussels II ter Regulation. Only if the rules are interpreted with a sense of proportion the desired improvements can be achieved.
For the law of state immunity, this move is particularly significant because China had been the most important adherent to the rival, absolute theory of foreign state immunity. In two prior posts ( here and here ), I discussed a draft of the FSIL (English translation here ). Russia and China long adhered to the absolute theory.
Judgments Convention: Revised Draft Explanatory Report”, HCCH Prel.-Doc. Indirect jurisdiction and Swedish law – Analysis and inquiry of the jurisdiction of Swedish courts in relation to the 2019 Hague Convention on Recognition and Enforcement”. Garcimartín Alférez, Francisco; Saumier, Geneviève. Nygh, Peter; Pocar, Fausto.
Judgments Convention: Revised Draft Explanatory Report”, HCCH Prel.-Doc. The Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act and the Hague Judgments and Jurisdictions Projects”, Osgoode Hall Law Journal 55 (2018), pp 257-304. Garcimartín Alférez, Francisco; Saumier, Geneviève. 1 of December 2018 (available here ). Blom, Joost.
Judgments Convention: Revised Draft Explanatory Report”, HCCH Prel.-Doc. The Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act and the Hague Judgments and Jurisdictions Projects”, Osgoode Hall Law Journal 55 (2018), pp 257-304. Garcimartín Alférez, Francisco; Saumier, Geneviève. 1 of December 2018 (available here ). Blom, Joost.
Judgments Convention: Revised Draft Explanatory Report”, HCCH Prel.-Doc. The Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act and the Hague Judgments and Jurisdictions Projects”, Osgoode Hall Law Journal 55 (2018), pp 257-304. Garcimartín Alférez, Francisco; Saumier, Geneviève. 1 of December 2018 (available here ). Blom, Joost.
Judgments Convention: Revised Draft Explanatory Report”, HCCH Prel.-Doc. Indirect jurisdiction and Swedish law – Analysis and inquiry of the jurisdiction of Swedish courts in relation to the 2019 Hague Convention on Recognition and Enforcement”. Garcimartín Alférez, Francisco; Saumier, Geneviève. Nygh, Peter; Pocar, Fausto.
“Judgments Convention: Revised Draft Explanatory Report”, HCCH Prel.-Doc. Brexit and the Future of Private International Law in English Courts”, Oxford 2022. Indirect jurisdiction and Swedish law – Analysis and inquiry of the jurisdiction of Swedish courts in relation to the 2019 Hague Convention on Recognition and Enforcement”.
“Judgments Convention: Revised Draft Explanatory Report”, HCCH Prel.-Doc. Brexit and the Future of Private International Law in English Courts”, Oxford 2022. Indirect jurisdiction and Swedish law – Analysis and inquiry of the jurisdiction of Swedish courts in relation to the 2019 Hague Convention on Recognition and Enforcement”.
“Judgments Convention: Revised Draft Explanatory Report”, HCCH Prel.-Doc. Brexit and the Future of Private International Law in English Courts”, Oxford 2022. Indirect jurisdiction and Swedish law – Analysis and inquiry of the jurisdiction of Swedish courts in relation to the 2019 Hague Convention on Recognition and Enforcement”.
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. Implementing the Hague Judgments Convention”, New York University Law Review 97 (2022), pp.
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. Implementing the Hague Judgments Convention”, New York University Law Review 97 (2022), pp.
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. Implementing the Hague Judgments Convention”, New York University Law Review 97 (2022), pp.
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