One of the issues left untouched by the Brussels Convention of 27 September 1968 (and by the Brussels-1 Regulation replacing it) concerns the leeway left to domestic courts when applying European rules on international jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters. For instance, is the court under a duty of strict compliance with the jurisdiction rule as it is drafted? Would such a duty go so far as to require the court to abide by the jurisdiction rule, even though it is being used by one of th…
One of the issues left untouched by the Brussels Convention of 27 September 1968 (and by the Brussels-1 Regulation replacing it) concerns the leeway left to domestic courts when applying European rules on international jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters. For instance, is the court under a duty of strict compliance with the jurisdiction rule as it is drafted? Would such a duty go so far as to require the court to abide by the jurisdiction rule, even though it is being used by one of the litigants to achieve an unfair result, for example to delay adjudication on the merits? Under what conditions may the Court decline jurisdiction on account of any unsuitable forum shopping, thus ruling out the European provision on jurisdiction?
Recent litigation in the ECJ has yielded rather, even excessively, restrictive answers, ruling out any discretion by domestic courts to remedy any inconvenience arising from the strict application of the European provisions, if such discretion were provided for by the lex fori (the Gasser case, the Turner case, and the Owusu case). This series of rulings from the ECJ raises several questions. Most observers have questioned the appropriateness of prescribing a blind application of European rules on jurisdiction by domestic courts, relying on the legal traditions of EC Member States usually providing for corrective mechanisms - such as 'forum non conveniens' in English Law and 'exception de fraude' in French Law - in cases when a party abusively triggers the jurisdiction of a court in order to obtain an unjust advantage, thus practising unacceptable forum shopping. The time has now come for an analysis, under both Community and comparative law, of the ramifications of the recent Gasser/Turner/Owusu cases. Readers will find in this book a collection of studies by some of the leading English and French experts today, analysing the ins and outs of jurisdiction and forum shopping in Europe.
One of the issues left untouched by the Brussels Convention of 27 September 1968 (and by the Brussels-1 Regulation replacing it) concerns the leeway left to domestic courts when applying European rules on international jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters. For instance, is the court under a duty of strict compliance with the jurisdiction rule as it is drafted? Would such a duty go so far as to require the court to abide by the jurisdiction rule, even though it is being used by one of the litigants to achieve an unfair result, for example to delay adjudication on the merits? Under what conditions may the Court decline jurisdiction on account of any unsuitable forum shopping, thus ruling out the European provision on jurisdiction?
Recent litigation in the ECJ has yielded rather, even excessively, restrictive answers, ruling out any discretion by domestic courts to remedy any inconvenience arising from the strict application of the European provisions, if such discretion were provided for by the lex fori (the Gasser case, the Turner case, and the Owusu case). This series of rulings from the ECJ raises several questions. Most observers have questioned the appropriateness of prescribing a blind application of European rules on jurisdiction by domestic courts, relying on the legal traditions of EC Member States usually providing for corrective mechanisms - such as 'forum non conveniens' in English Law and 'exception de fraude' in French Law - in cases when a party abusively triggers the jurisdiction of a court in order to obtain an unjust advantage, thus practising unacceptable forum shopping. The time has now come for an analysis, under both Community and comparative law, of the ramifications of the recent Gasser/Turner/Owusu cases. Readers will find in this book a collection of studies by some of the leading English and French experts today, analysing the ins and outs of jurisdiction and forum shopping in Europe.
Atsiliepimai
Atsiliepimų nėra
0 pirkėjai įvertino šią prekę.
5
0%
4
0%
3
0%
2
0%
1
0%
Kainos garantija
Ženkliuku „Kainos garantija” pažymėtoms prekėms Knygos.lt garantuoja geriausią kainą. Jei identiška prekė kitoje internetinėje parduotuvėje kainuoja mažiau - kompensuojame kainų skirtumą. Kainos lyginamos su knygos.lt nurodytų parduotuvių sąrašu prekių kainomis. Knygos.lt įsipareigoja kompensuoti kainų skirtumą pirkėjui, kuris kreipėsi „Kainos garantijos” taisyklėse nurodytomis sąlygomis. Sužinoti daugiau
Elektroninė knyga
22,39 €
DĖMESIO!
Ši knyga pateikiama ACSM formatu. Jis nėra tinkamas įprastoms skaityklėms, kurios palaiko EPUB ar MOBI formato el. knygas.
Svarbu! Nėra galimybės siųstis el. knygų jungiantis iš Jungtinės Karalystės.
Tai knyga, kurią parduoda privatus žmogus. Kai apmokėsite užsakymą, jį per 7 d. išsiųs knygos pardavėjas . Jei to pardavėjas nepadarys laiku, pinigai jums bus grąžinti automatiškai.
Šios knygos būklė nėra įvertinta knygos.lt ekspertų, todėl visa atsakomybė už nurodytą knygos kokybę priklauso pardavėjui.
Perskaityta knyga:
Nenauja knyga, kuri parduodama tiesiai iš knygos.lt sandėlio. Knygos kokybė įvertinta knygos.lt ekspertų.
Tai knyga, kurią parduoda privatus žmogus. Kai apmokėsite užsakymą, jį per 7 d. išsiųs knygos pardavėjas . Jei to pardavėjas nepadarys laiku, pinigai jums bus grąžinti automatiškai.
Šios knygos būklė nėra įvertinta knygos.lt ekspertų, todėl visa atsakomybė už nurodytą knygos kokybę priklauso pardavėjui.
Atsiliepimai