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
Background China’s Civil ProcedureLaw was enacted in April 1991 by the Fourth Session of the Seventh National People’s Congress. The latest amendments to the Civil ProcedureLaw in 2023, referred to as the new CPL, involve 26 amendments, including 14 modified articles and 15 new additions.
International family and succession law as well as questions of citizenship became a focus of his academic research and publications for decades, including his Habilitation in 1971 on „Die Familie im Recht der unerlaubten Handlungen” (“The Family in TortLaw“), [2] in particular with a view to relations connected with Italy.
We would like to explore these and many other related questions at the 4th German-speaking Conference for Young Scholars in Private International Law. The written contributions will be published in an edited conference volume. The conference will be held in German, but English presentations are also welcome.
Under the Civil ProcedureLaw of China (CPL), the general rule of territorial jurisdiction is that a civil action shall be brought in the People’s Court of the place in which the defendant is domiciled subject to various exceptions grouped together under the title of “special jurisdictions”. [9] 8] Id, at pp. 14] E.g., Winkworth v.
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. While the decision is formally a procedural one, its most striking passages address substantive tortlaw.
Penasthika rightly observes that this signifies confusion between jurisdiction and choice of law, because what the Indonesian courts should apply is substantive and not procedurallaw. Procedurallaw matters are reserved for the forum, and some Indonesian judges only appear to see the procedural aspects of choice of law.
Territorial Tort Exception Article 9 of the FSIL creates an exception to immunity for claims “arising from personal injury or death or damage to movable or immovable property caused by the relevant act of the foreign state in PRC territory.” It is unclear if Chinese courts applying the FSIL will reach the same conclusion.
First, Shell stated that the claimants abused procedurallaw, because the claims against Royal Dutch Shall were ‘obviously bound to fail and for that reason could not serve as a basis for jurisdiction as provided in art. Applicable law is defined based on the Dutch conflict of laws rules on torts, namely art.
Article 51 of the PRC Maritime Special ProcedureLaw provides that the maritime court may upon the application of a maritime claimant issue a maritime injunction to compel the respondent to do or not to do certain acts in order to protect the claimant’s lawful rights and interests from being infringed. [4] See Article 100, para.1
If on the basis of question 1a (and/or 1b) not only one but several internally competent judges in the relevant Member State are designated, does Article 7, point 2, Brussels I bis then oppose the application of national (procedural) law that allows referral to one court within that Member State?
Contractual” duties of care corresponding with negligence in tort, on the other hand, fall within the scope of the Regulation Rome II. For the contracting parties as well as for third parties, the conflict-of-laws in claims following the disregard of such duties is determined by the application of Article 4 Regulation Rome II.
Written by NIE Yuxin and LIU Chang, Wuhan University Institute of International Law. The present Civil ProcedureLaw of China (hereinafter “CPL”) was enacted in 1990 and has been amended four times. All amendments made no substantive adjustments to the foreign-related civil procedure proceedings. Background. 276, para.
Professor Kerameus started his academic career at the Law School of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, in his home town, and completed his career at the University of Athens. He taught Civil Procedure, Comparative and International ProceduralLaw in Greek and other leading Universities abroad.
The principal focus will be on questions of jurisdiction, the recognition and enforcement of judgments and choice of law for contract and tort. Zwirlein-Forschner: Road Tolls in Conflict of Laws and International Jurisdiction – a Cross-Border Journey between the European Regulations.
The first four issues of the previous year were dedicated to the fundamental and most current issues of European private/procedural international law: the judicial cooperation after BREXIT (1 st issue), the impact of 40 years since Greece joined the European Union to the internal ProceduralLaw (2 nd issue), the importance of private autonomy in European (..)
The CJEU (Grand Chamber) has issued a landmark ruling on the borderline between contract and tort disputes under Article 7(1) and (2) of the Brussels I-bis Regulation. 102 TFEU and/or national competition law rules. The decision also deals with questions of German procedurallaw.
Reimann: Human Rights Litigation Beyond the Alien Tort Claims Act: The Crucial Role of the Act of State Doctrine. Even after the Supreme Court’s dismantling of the Alien Tort Claims Act jurisdiction remains possible, though everything depends on the circumstances.
The Court of Appeal held that misuse of private information and contravention of the statutory data protection requirements was a tort and therefore, if damage had been sustained within England, the English courts had jurisdiction and service to the USA (California) was allowed.
Specific jurisdiction in matters relating to tort will be of little use, as in value chain civil liability claims the place of the event giving rise to damages and the place of damage are usually outside the EU and within that third state. This is a problem of uniformity – different national laws allow for different answers.
In general, following the procedurallaw principle of actor sequitur forum rei , the Canadian trust should be brought to court in Canadian courts. 32 German Civil Procedure Code, tort claims can be brought to the court where the harmful act happened regardless of the defendant’s domicile.
11] While this undoubtedly represents the correct position of the law in principle, it is however of doubtful practical effect given the peculiarity of the diminishing line between rationes decidendi and obiter dicta under the Nigerian version of the doctrine of stare decisis as well the attitude of Nigerian courts to decisions of higher courts.
Written by Jidong Lin, Wuhan University Institute of International Law Background China’s newly amended Civil ProcedureLaw (“CPL 2024”), which came into effect on 1 January 2024, introduces several distinct and innovative changes. npc/c2/c30834/202112/t20211227_315637.html> html> accessed 13 October 2024. [2]
The following analysis undertakes the attempt to clarify the key aspects from the perspective of German international private law. Eichel: Choice of Court Agreements and Rules of Interpretation in the Context of Tort or Anti-trust Claims. 1 Lugano Convention 2007 vis-à-vis claims in tort. 1 Brussels Ia Regulation/Art.
In addition, the Bundesgerichtshof commented on disputed questions of private international law concerning the limitation of liability under maritime law. Under the Rome II Regulation, however, the court classified such claims not as tort claims but as claims falling under Art. 10 (“unjust enrichment”).
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