scholarly journals Kolizyjnoprawna problematyka skuteczności przelewu wierzytelności wobec osób trzecich Glosa do wyroku Trybunału Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej z dnia 9 października 2019 r. w sprawie BGL BNP Paribas SA c/a TeamBank AG Nürnberg (C‑548/18)

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 ◽  
pp. 223-236
Author(s):  
Witold Kurowski
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Conflict Of Laws ◽  
The Third ◽  
Common Opinion ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Third Party ◽  
Rome I ◽  
The Eu

The question of the law applicable to the third-party effects of assignments of claims is widely discussed in the doctrinal debates. In common opinion, the existing European conflict-of-laws regulations do not provide for a rule governing this issue. In the case BGL BNP Paribas SA v. TeamBank AG Nürnberg (C‑548/18), the Court of Justice of the European Union confirmed this gape of the Rome I Regulation.The gloss presents the justification of the European Union Court’s judgment, the reasons for the lack of the uniform conflict-of-laws regulation, and the consequences of this state. It also analyses briefly the European Commission’s proposal for the EU Regulation concerning the law applicable to the third-party effects of assignments of claims (COM(2018) 96 final), as a response to this situation. Finally, it examines the appropriate conflict-of-laws rules for proprietary effects of assignments of claims (the law of the assignor’s habitual residence and the law of the assigned claim).

The law applicable to third-party effects of transactions in intermediated securities

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 685-710
Author(s):  
Florian Heindler
Keyword(s):  
Third Party ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Conflict Of Laws ◽  
Settlement Systems ◽  
The Third ◽  
International Trends ◽  
Current Trends ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
The Third Party ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The conflict-of-laws rules applicable to the third-party effects of transactions in intermediated securities have attracted a great deal of interest in legal practice and academia. The article reviews the current legal developments in the European Union (EU), the international trends (Geneva Securities Convention and Hague Securities Convention), and the challenges of technological innovation. The article proposes interpreting the category of conflict-of-laws rules applicable to the third-party effects of transactions in intermediated securities in a concise, short, functional, and abstract way. Furthermore, it puts the discussions on the proper connecting factor into context and comments on the most recent developments in the EU in this respect. Finally, it adds to the discussion on proper connecting factors for digital ledger technology-based settlement systems (blockchain) and other current trends.

scholarly journals Kolizyjnoprawna problematyka skuteczności przelewu wierzytelności wobec osób trzecich — projekt rozporządzenia Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady w sprawie prawa właściwego dla skutków przelewu wierzytelności wobec osób trzecich (COM(2018) 96 final)

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 67-90
Author(s):  
Witold Kurowski
Keyword(s):  
Third Parties ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Habitual Residence ◽  
Eu Regulation ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Third Party ◽  
Contractual Obligations ◽  
Rome I

The question of which law should govern the third-party effects of assignments of claims was considered during the preparation of the Rome I Regulation. The European Commission’s proposal for the Rome I Regulation admitted the law of the assignor’s habitual residence as the law that should apply to the proprietary effects of assignments of claims. Finally, EU Regulation on the law applicable to contractual obligations did not include the issue of the third-party effects of the assignment. However, Article 27(2) of the Rome I Regulation required the European Commission to present a report on the question of the effectiveness of assignments of claims against third parties accompanied, if appropriate, by a proposal to amend the Rome I Regulation. Proposal for a Regulation on the law applicable to the third-party effects of assignments of claims (COM(2018) 96 final) is a response to this request. This paper analyses current draft of the new EU Regulation, the rules on determination of the third-party effects of assignments of claims (law of the assignor’s habitual residence and law of the assigned claim) and "super conflict rules" in specific cases. The author argues that the law of the assignor’s habitual residence remains the appropriate conflict rule for proprietary effects of assignments of claims.

scholarly journals PROTECTION OF ECONOMIC COMPETITION: AN OVERVIEW OF THE LATEST LEGISLATIVE NOVELTIES

2019 ◽  
pp. 165-171
Author(s):  
Sergii Shkliar ◽  
Olha Bulaieva
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Procedural Justice ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Economic Competition ◽  
Time Limits ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

Purpose. The article is dedicated to the analysis of the main changes introduced by the Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to Some Laws of Ukraine ensuring the principles of procedural justice and increasing the efficiency of proceedings in cases of violations of the legislation on the protection of economic competition”. Methods. Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to Some Laws of Ukraine ensuring the principles of procedural justice and increasing the efficiency of proceedings in cases of violations of the legislation on the protection of economic competition” proposes the implementation of several novelties. Among them are: the restriction for the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine by certain time limits for considering cases; possibility of extension of the term for consideration of cases by decision of the Committee’s State Commissioner or head of a territorial office; renewal of deadlines for consideration of cases where the respondent is replaced or a co-respondent is involved; provision for the consequences of missing the deadlines for considering cases and also the mechanism of consultations during the consideration of a case, which may be appointed either on the initiative of the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine or on the motion of interested persons. Results. The abovementioned amendments will influence the existing system of economic competition protection in a serious way. Among the changes are: – the fine for delayed payment of a fine imposed by the Antimonopoly Committees of Ukraine decision on violation of the legislation on the protection of economic competition is cancelled; – the member of the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine who conducted or organized an investigation is deprived of the right to vote in the process of decision-making in the respective case; – the procedure for holding hearings is defined; – recusals and self-recusals are envisaged for the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine officers; – the grounds for acquiring the third-party status in a case are changed; – the rights of persons involved in the case are specified and expanded. An important remark of the Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to Some Laws of Ukraine ensuring the principles of procedural justice and increasing the efficiency of proceedings in cases of violations of the legislation on the protection of economic competition” is that a person that is exempted from liability or whose fine is reduced shall still be liable for damage caused by the violation to other persons. Conclusions. As a result, Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to Some Laws of Ukraine ensuring the principles of procedural justice and increasing the efficiency of proceedings in cases of violations of the legislation on the protection of economic competition” is expected to become an important step forward in increasing the effectiveness of investigations into violations of the legislation on the protection of economic competition. It can also be regarded as the next step to harmonize Ukrainian legislation with the European Union acquis.

Policing Maastricht

1997 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-53
Author(s):  
N.S.J. Baxter
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Third ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons ◽  
New Community ◽  
The Eu

In February 1992 the Treaty of European Union was signed at Maastricht. It committed member States to new Community goals which included increasing government cooperation in the fields of foreign and security policy along with justice and home affairs (Steiner, 1994). The following “pillars” to develop the Union were identified. First of all, the protection of the rights and interests of people was strengthened by introducing citizenship of the European Union (EU); secondly a commitment was made to implement a common foreign and security policy indicated a movement towards a common defence of the Union against third party States. The third pillar seeks to facilitate the free movement of persons, while ensuring their safety and security through member States, by working closely in the areas of justice and home affairs (Benyon et al, 1993). It is this latter aspect which has implications for policing within the EU.

The law applicable to third-party effects of assignments of claims: the UN Convention and the EU Commission Proposal compared

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 609-632
Author(s):  
Spyridon V Bazinas
Keyword(s):  
Third Party ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Us ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Third Party ◽  
Draft Regulation ◽  
Proposed Regulation ◽  
Eu Commission ◽  
The Eu

Abstract In October 2019, the U.S. ratified the United Nations Convention on the Assignment of Receivables in International Trade (the “Convention”) by the US, thus creating a new impetus for the broad adoption and entry into force of the Convention and with that for the facilitation of international receivables finance. In March 2018, the E.U. Commission issued a Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the law applicable to the third-party effects of assignments of claims (the “Commission Proposal” or “Proposal”). The Commission Proposal includes a first draft of the proposed Regulation (the “draft Regulation”). An alignment of the main rule of the draft Regulation with the equivalent rule in the Convention could result in an internationally uniform conflict-of-laws rule on this matter, which would remove the legal divergences existing among legal systems and reduce the uncertainty as to the law applicable to the third-party effects of assignments of claims. The purpose of this article is to compare the relevant rules of the Convention and the draft Regulation, determine whether this coordinated approach is achieved and, if not, make suggestions as to how it can be achieved to the benefit of all parties involved in international receivables finance.

Part 2 National and Regional Reports, Part 2.4 Europe: Coordinated by Thomas Kadner Graziano, 43 European Union: European Union Perspectives on the Hague Principles

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graziano Thomas Kadner ◽  
Garcimartín Francisco ◽  
Van Calster Geert
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Choice Of Law ◽  
Foreign Law ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Law ◽  
Contractual Obligations ◽  
Rome I ◽  
The Eu

This chapter evaluates European Union perspectives on the Hague Principles. The Rome I Regulation on the law applicable to contractual obligations is the most important instrument for determining the law governing international commercial contracts in the EU. It is a legislative act of the European Union and directly applies in all Member States of the European Union except for Denmark. For many issues, the Rome I Regulation is in conformity with the Hague Principles. Where the Hague Principles cover issues that have not yet been explicitly addressed by the Rome I Regulation, such as choice of law clauses in standard forms in Article 6(1)(b) of the Hague Principles, the European legislator may very well take the Hague Principles into consideration when amending the Regulation. In fact, the European legislator regularly takes inspiration from international and foreign law when legislating, amending the law, or covering new issues. In academic commentary, it has been suggested that the next revision of the Rome I Regulation shall, for certain issues, indeed take inspiration from the Hague Principles.

Relaxations of Contractual Privity and the Need for Third Party Rights in Chinese Contract Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chen Lei
Keyword(s):  
Direct Action ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Chinese Law ◽  
The Third ◽  
Right Of Action ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Third Party ◽  
The Right

This chapter examines the position of third party beneficiaries in Chinese law. Article 64 of the Chinese Contract Law states that where a contract for the benefit of a third party is breached, the debtor is liable to the creditor. The author regards this as leaving unanswered the question of whether the thirdparty has a right of direct action against the debtor. One view regards the third party as having the right to sue for the benefit although this right was ultimately excluded from the law. Another view, supported by the Supreme People’s Court, is that Article 64 does not provide a right of action for a third party and merely prescribes performance in ‘incidental’ third party contracts. The third view is that there is a third party right of action in cases of ‘genuine’ third party contracts but courts are unlikely to recognize a third party action where the contract merely purports to confer a benefit on the third party.

Effektivität des Grundrechtsschutzes in der Europäischen Union

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Law ◽  
European University ◽  
The Eu

The volume includes contributions from a meeting of the Frankfurt Institute for the Law of the European Union of the Faculty of Law of the European University Viadrina on the effectiveness of the protection of fundamental rights in the EU on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of the legal binding nature of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. With contributions by Markus Rau, LL.M.; Dr. Peter Szczekalla; Prof. apl. Dr. Carmen Thiele; RA Dr. Christian Hilbrandt; Prof. Dr. Walter Frenz; Prof. Dr. Ines Härtel; Clara Pira Machel and Gabriel N. Toggenburg.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document