COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No. 1348/2000 of 29 May 2000 ON THE SERVICE IN THE MEMBER STATES OF JUDICIAL AND EXTRAJUDICIAL DOCUMENTS IN CIVIL OR COMMERCIAL MATTERS

2009 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Member States ◽  
Council Regulation

BOOK REVIEWSBOOK REVIEWSvan der WeideJ. A.Lecturer in private international law, Faculty of Law, Free University, Amsterdam122001483367371RutgersJ.W., International Reservation of Title Clauses: A Study of Dutch, French and German Private International Law in the Light of European Law, T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague 1999, XI + 233 pp., € 61.50/US$ 81/UK£ 47.25. ISBN 90-6704-116-5.Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 20012001T.M.C. Asser PresspdfS0165070X00001388a.pdfdispartBook Reviews1.See, e.g., VlietL.P.W. van, Transfer of Movables in German, French, English and Dutch Law (diss. Maastricht) (Nijmegen, Ars Aequi Libri 2000).2.1968 Brussels Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, most recently amended by the 1996 Accession Convention. The Brussels Convention will be converted into the Council Regulation (EC) No. 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (Official Journal ECL 12, 16 01 2001), which will come into force on 1 March 2002. This Council Regulation shall apply to all EC Member States except Denmark.3.Directive 2000/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 June 2000 (Official Journal EC L 200, 8 08 2000). Art. 4 states: ‘1) Member States shall provide in conformity with the applicable national provisions designated by private international law that the seller retains title to goods until they are fully paid for if a retention of title clause has been expressly agreed between the buyer and the seller before the delivery of the goods. 2) Member States may adopt or retain provisions dealing with down payments already made by the debtor.’4.See, e.g., MünchKomm-Kreuzer, Internatonales sachenrecht (München, C.H. Beck 1998), Nach Art. 38 Anh. I, nrs. 66–67; Staudinger/Stoll, Internationales Sachenrecht (Berlin, Sellier de Gruyter 1996) nrs. 282–285 and 292–294; WeberR.H., ‘Parteiautonomie im internationalen Sachenrecht?

2001 ◽  
Vol 48 (03) ◽  
pp. 367
Author(s):  
J. A. van der Weide
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Official Journal ◽  
Brussels Convention ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
European Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Law Faculty ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Hague ◽  
Council Regulation

scholarly journals Legal Foundations for Exporting Dual-Use Goods from the European Union

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 44-56
Author(s):  
V. Yu. Slepak
Keyword(s):  
Legal Regulation ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Dual Use ◽  
Member States ◽  
National Regulation ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Legal Obligations ◽  
Council Regulation ◽  
The One ◽  
The Eu

The paper is devoted to the examination of the main aspects of the legal regulation of exporting dual-use goods in the EU under Council Regulation (EU) No. 428/2009 of 5 May 2009. The main objective of the instrument under consideration is to establish a system common for EU Member States to control effectively the export of dual-use goods in order to ensure compliance of EU member States with international obligations, especially with regard to the regime of non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. The author concludes that the current Regulation on export of dual-use goods is a logical extension and continuation of the EU instruments regulating arms trade with the third countries that pursues the same objectives, i.e. to implement the international legal obligations of the EU Member States assumed under multilateral control and non-proliferation regimes. Under the selected regulatory model, the EU failed to take the opportunity of replacing relevant national regulation; the Dual-Use Export Regulation defines a general framework, leaving it to Member States to take certain measures aimed at promoting an EU-wide approach. It is up to Member States to establish an appropriate control system for transactions, involving dual-use products, carried out by their nationals and legal entities. On the one hand, it allows the authorities of Member States, due to their proximity to economic entities, to take into account to a greater extent the characteristics of the national market. On the other hand, such a system leads to discrepancies in the practice of applying, in theory at least, uniform measures for the whole Union. Thus, even with the legal basis for independent and exclusive regulation of the export of dual-use products, the EU has faced with the unwillingness of Member States to adopt such restrictions and had to focus on coordinating the activities of Member States, leaving them with a considerable degree of independence and autonomy.

CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS: I. Brussels II bis: Matrimonial Matters, Parental Responsibility, Child Abduction and Mutual Recognition

2004 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 503-512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter McEleavy
Keyword(s):  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Council Meeting ◽  
Parental Responsibility ◽  
Member States ◽  
Child Abduction ◽  
Formal Classification ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
Council Regulation

At the Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Council meeting in Brussels on 2 and 3 October 2003 final political agreement was reached on a new and expanded version of the Brussels II Regulation, a text which has commonly become known as Brussels II bis. The instrument, which was adopted by the JHA ministers on 27 November, has now received formal classification as Council Regulation No 2201/2003 Concerning Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Matrimonial Matters and Matters Relating to Parental Responsibility Repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000.1 The net result of this precipitous reform is that Brussels JJ shall cease to have effect from 1 May 2005,2 a mere 4 years and 2 months after it entered into force. Henceforth there will be a single, integrated instrument which will cover, inter alia, the free movement of judgments in matters of parental responsibility as well as of matrimonial judgments and introduce provisions on cooperation between Member States.

scholarly journals Odlučivanje o imovinskim odnosima bračnih drugova u ostavinskim postupcima sukladno Uredbi 2016/1103 o bračnoimovinskom režimu

2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 449-471
Author(s):  
Paula Poretti
Keyword(s):  
Family Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
International Couples ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
Council Regulation ◽  
Property Regimes ◽  
European Family ◽  
Open Issues

Council Regulation (EU) 2016/1103 of 24 June 2016 implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of matrimonial property regimes (hereinafter: Regulation 2016/1103) provides for uniform rules which should facilitate delivering of judgments concerning matrimonial property in cross-border disputes in 18 Member States which established enhanced cooperation between themselves in the area of the property regimes of international couples. The application of the Regulation 2016/1103 should contribue to the application of other european instruments in the fi eld of european family law in divorce and succession proceedings. The paper presents rules on jurisdiction and applicable law under the Regulation 2016/1103 which should be applied in proceedings concerning matrimonial property regimes. Application of the provisions of Regulation 2016/1103 on jurisdiction and applicable law in proceedings for succession will be analyzed. The paper elaborates on certain potentially problematic solutions and open issues revealed through interpretation of provisions of Regulation 2016/1103 which could cause doubts and uncertainties for the court and public notaries. Possible solutions which could remove diffi culties and insuffi ciencies in the application of the Regulation 2016/1103 will be suggested.

scholarly journals COOL potatoes? Poland plans to introduce mandatory country of origin labelling for fresh potatoes

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 208-218
Author(s):  
Ignacio CARREÑO ◽  
Lourdes MEDINA PÉREZ
Keyword(s):  
Rural Development ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Fruits And Vegetables ◽  
Country Of Origin ◽  
Fruit And Vegetables ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Council Regulation ◽  
Draft Regulation ◽  
The Eu

On 14 November 2018, Poland’s Ministry for Agriculture and Rural Development notified the European Commission (hereinafter, Commission) of its intention to introduce mandatory country of origin labelling (hereinafter, COOL) for potatoes on the basis of a Draft Regulation of the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Development amending the Regulation on the labelling of certain foodstuffs (hereinafter, Draft Regulation).1 Poland’s notification is the most recent example of the continuously increasing number of EU Member States’ measures on COOL for foodstuffs. While the EU already provides COOL requirements for fruits and vegetables in Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors2 (hereinafter, Regulation (EU) No 543/2011), they do not apply to fresh potatoes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document