Part III Jurisdiction, Foreign Judgments and Awards, 11 Jurisdiction Under the Brussels/Lugano System

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Torremans Paul
Keyword(s):  
Hague Convention ◽  
Brussels Convention ◽  
System P ◽  
The Hague ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Hague Convention

This chapter examines the jurisdiction of the English courts under the Brussels/Lugano system (the Brussels I Recast, the EC/Denmark Agreement, the Brussels Convention, and the Lugano Convention) and under the modified version of the Brussels I Regulation (Modified Regulation). It first provides an overview of the history and interpretation of the Brussels/Lugano system and the Modified Regulation before turning to the Brussels I Recast, discussing in particular the definition of domicile and the conditions under which the Brussels I Recast applies. It then considers the bases of jurisdiction under the Brussels I Recast, along with various provisions of the Brussels I Regulation relating to jurisdiction and stays of action. It also explores the provisions of the Brussels Convention, the Lugano Convention, and the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements. Finally, it analyses the issue of allocating jurisdiction within the UK under the Modified Regulation.

scholarly journals Transfer of Ownership in fiducia and Trust – Preliminary Considerations on the Possibilty of Application of the Hague Convention on the Law Applicable to Trusts and on their Recognition

2018 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 579-605
Author(s):  
Tomislav Karlović
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Roman Law ◽  
Real Property ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Law ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Hague Convention

Considering the main characteristics of fiducia in Roman law, as well as its functions and place within the real property law and the law of obligations, two features that are also prominent in the definition of anglosaxon trust stand out. These are the fiduciary nature of the relationship between the interested parties, as fides (trust) formed the initial basis of both institutes in the period before they were legally recognized, and the transfer of ownership made for specific purpose, different from the regular enjoyment of the object by the owner. However, there is a significant difference between the two (fiducia and trust) becuase of the duality between common law and equity in English legal system. While the mutual interests of the parties to fiducia in Roman law were protected only by personal actions (actiones in personam), parties’ proprietary interests in English trust were (and still are) recognized with the parallel existence of legal and equitable title. In contemporary Croatian law of real property the closest thing to the division of titles exists with regard to the conditionally transferred ownership as regulated in Art. 34 of Ownership and Other Proprietary Rights Act, entaling the division on prior and posterior ownership, both of which can be entered into Land registry and other registries. In the article it is analysed how this division and the following registration of both titles could allow for the effects to be given to trusts, in case it would be pondered on the benefits of accession of Croatia to the Hague Convention on the Law Applicable to Trusts and on their Recognition. Accordingly, after the exposition of Croatian law, it is given a short overview of English trust with emphasis on trusts of land and, subsequently, of the rules of the Hague Convention on the Law Applicable to Trusts and on their Recognition. In the conclusion it is argued that perceived incompatibility of trust with civilian legal system can be overcome in Croatia with the help of extant legal rules regarding conditionally transferred ownership. Also, this incompatibility has already been refuted in several European continental countries from which examples lessons should be studied and learned, what would be the next step in the deliberations on the accession to the Hague Convention on the Law Applicable to Trusts and on their Recognition.

Bermuda

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Bruce-Smith ◽  
Ben Adamson
Keyword(s):  
Hague Convention ◽  
The Hague ◽  
Uk Government ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Hague Convention

The UK Recognition of Trusts Act 1987 (‘RTA 1987’) was made applicable to Bermuda as of 1 June 1989 by an Order in Council from the UK government. The RTA 1987 incorporates the key provisions of The Hague Convention on the Recognition of Trusts (the ‘Hague Convention’). The Trusts (Special Provisions) Act 1989 (‘TSPA 1989’), one of Bermuda’s key trust statutes, adopted certain provisions of the Hague Convention verbatim and came into effect on 31 January 1990.

Is the Jurisdiction of England and Wales Correctly Applying the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction?

2002 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 427-435 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Armstrong
Keyword(s):  
Significant Proportion ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Central Authority ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Child Abduction ◽  
International Child ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Hague Convention

The jurisdiction of England and Wales is vastly experienced in application of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction1 (the Convention). The UK2 was the fifth3 Contracting State to the Convention, which now boasts 70 State Parties,4 and England and Wales consistently handles a significant proportion of annual Convention applications. In terms of applications, which were processed by Central Authorities, England and Wales was the second busiest Convention jurisdiction in 1999.5 The USA handled 466 applications, England and Wales 329, and Germany 210. Indeed the Central Authority for England and Wales handled more applications than any other, the USA having split incoming and outgoing applications between two separate bodies.6

The Hague Convention on the Protection of Children and Co-Operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption

1993 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 9-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Duncan
Keyword(s):  
Hague Convention ◽  
Intercountry Adoption ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Hague Convention

The process of implementing the Hague Convention on intercountry adoption now begins. William Duncan outlines the Convention's key provisions and points to some of the difficult decisions confronting the UK.

12 Protection of the Wounded, Sick, and Shipwrecked

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kleffner Jann K ◽  
von Heinegg Wolff Heintschel
Keyword(s):  
Geneva Convention ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Medical Personnel ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
The Hague ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Hague Convention

This chapter studies the protection of the wounded, sick, and shipwrecked. The definition of persons protected under the various treaties for the protection of the wounded, sick, and shipwrecked evolved constantly from the adoption of the 1864 Geneva Convention, which only applied to ‘combatants’. The 1906 Geneva Convention subsequently broadened the scope of application to add ‘other persons officially attached to the armed forces’, and the 1929 Geneva Convention similarly referred to ‘officers and soldiers and other persons officially attached to the armed forces’. As far as warfare at sea was concerned, the Hague Convention (III) of 1899 applied to ‘sailors and soldiers who are taken on board’, while the 1907 Hague Convention (X) added to this definition ‘other persons officially attached to fleets or armies’ in analogy to the 1906 Geneva Convention. The chapter then looks at the protection of medical personnel and the rules of international humanitarian law on the dead and missing persons. It also details the development which has led to the adoption of a new protective emblem: the Red Crystal.

In the Matter of Kl (A Child) (U.K. Sup. Ct.) & X v. Latvia (Eur. CT. H.R.)

2014 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 350-396
Author(s):  
Keith Loken
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
The United States ◽  
District Court ◽  
Court Order ◽  
Child Abduction ◽  
The Hague ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Hague Convention

On December 4, 2013, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom ruled in In the Matter of KL that a child brought to the UK pursuant to a U.S. district court order–subsequently overturned by a U.S. court of appeals–in a proceeding under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (Hague Convention) must be returned to the United States. One week earlier, in a 9-8 decision issued on November 26, 2013, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), upholding the judgment of the ECHR Chamber below, ruled in X v. Latvia that the actions of the Latvian courts, ordering Ms. X to return her daughter E. to Australia under the Hague Convention, constituted an infringement of Ms. X’s rights under Article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Human Rights Convention). These cases provide an interesting contrast in approaches to the international abduction of children.

Part III Jurisdiction, Foreign Judgments and Awards, 10 Jurisdiction of the English Courts—An Introduction

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Torremans Paul
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Brussels Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Hague Convention

This chapter provides an overview of issues relating to the jurisdiction of the English courts. It begins with a discussion of jurisdiction under the Brussels/Lugano system, focusing on four different sets of rules: the rules contained in the Brussels I Regulation as amended in the Brussels I Recast, the EC/Denmark Agreement, the Brussels Convention, and the Lugano Convention. It then considers jurisdiction under the rules contained in a modified version of the Brussels I Regulation, as well as jurisdiction under the traditional English rules (whether the English courts have power to hear the case; whether the court will decline jurisdiction or stay the proceedings. or restrain foreign proceedings; and whether there is a limitation upon the exercise of jurisdiction). The chapter also examines jurisdiction under the rules in the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements 2005, ratified by the European Union on behalf of all the Member States.

scholarly journals JUDICIAL COOPERATION IN CIVIL AND COMMERCIAL MATTERS AFTER BREXIT: WHICH WAY FORWARD?

2018 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giesela Rühl
Keyword(s):  
Hague Convention ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Choice Of Law ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Many ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Hague Convention ◽  
Rome I ◽  
The Eu

AbstractJudicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters is generally perceived to be of a rather ‘specialist and technical nature’. However, for the many UK and EU citizens, families and businesses who work, live, travel and do business abroad, the current European framework for choice of law, jurisdiction and recognition and enforcement is of paramount importance. The article, therefore, explores how that framework might look like after Brexit and explores the merits and demerits of the various ways forward. It argues that the best option for both the UK and the EU would be to agree on the continued application of the existing EU instruments or to strive for conclusion of a new agreement that closely replicates these instruments. If no such agreement can be reached the UK should decide to apply the Rome I and Rome II Regulations unilaterally and sign the Lugano Convention of 2007 as well as the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements of 2005.

Defining the Regulations of War in the Hague Convention of 1907

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erazak Tileubergeno ◽  
Dana Baisymakova ◽  
Dinara Belkhozhayeva ◽  
Zhanar Moldakhmetova
Keyword(s):  
Hague Convention ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Hague Convention
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document