Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments Between the European Union and Russia: Possible Prospects

2021 ◽  
pp. 181-190
Author(s):  
Vladimir Yarkov
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement

Dochodzenie roszczeń ze sprzedaży towarów w obrocie międzynarodowym na obszarze UE. Zagadnienie jurysdykcji

2016 ◽  
pp. 107-122
Author(s):  
Agata Michalska-Olek
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Community Law ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Way

The article aims to show the possible ways of judicial redress for claims resulting from sales of goods especially including the issue of jurisdiction and application of the provisions of national law or the provisions of Community law. In the article the provisions of the Convention of 30 October 2007 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters as well as the provisions of regulations of the European Parliament and of the Council were widely discussed. The author discusses in particular the issue related to cross-border contracts for the sales-of-goods within the European Union. Part of the deliberations concerns judicial rulings, in particular judicial decisions issued in cases in which the court shall consider the issue of jurisdiction of its own motion. In the conclusion of the article it is stated that the choice between the national jurisdiction and the jurisdiction of other states will depend on the terms of agreement between the parties as well as the documents related to the transaction, in particular consignment notes (CMR), and the EXW clauses – such a formulation means that the parties agreed to the way of delivery of goods according to the commercial (Incoterms) clauses, determining in such a way the issue of jurisdiction.

Supreme Site Services v. Shape (C.J.E.U.)

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Salim S. Sleiman
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Regulation ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
Dutch Supreme ◽  
Brussels Regulation

On September 3, 2020, following a request from the Dutch Supreme Court, the First Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) rendered its preliminary ruling in Supreme Site Services and Others v. SHAPE on the interpretation of Articles 1(1) and 24(5) of the European Union (EU) Regulation 1215/2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (Recast Brussels Regulation).

ANTI-SUIT INJUNCTIONS IN ARBITRAL AWARDS: ENFORCEMENT IN EUROPE

2015 ◽  
Vol 74 (3) ◽  
pp. 412-415
Author(s):  
Ewelina Kajkowska
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
State Courts ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Status ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Brussels Regulation

THE status of anti-suit injunctions in Europe has long given rise to controversy. The decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Case C-536/13, Gazprom OAO [2015] All E.R. (EC) 711 sheds a new light on the relationship between anti-suit injunctions and the European jurisdiction regime embodied in the Brussels Regulation (Regulation No. 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters). In this much anticipated judgment, the Court of Justice confirmed that, by virtue of the arbitration exclusion in Article 1(2)(d) of the Brussels Regulation, Member State courts are not precluded from enforcing anti-suit injunctions issued by arbitration tribunals and aimed at restraining the proceedings before Member State courts. Although the decision was given before the Recast Brussels Regulation came into force (Regulation No. 1215/2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, effective from 10 January 2015), it can be assumed that the same conclusion would have been reached under the new law.

Public Policy and Good Morals

2021 ◽  
pp. 336-391
Author(s):  
Martijn W. Hesselink
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
European Union ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Recognition ◽  
Freedom Of Contract ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
Moral Limits

This chapter addresses the question of whether a society committed in principle to the legal recognition and enforcement of contracts is free, nevertheless—or even required—to withhold recognition and enforceability from certain contracts, by declaring them ‘null’ or ‘void’ under contract law doctrines such as ‘good morals’ or ‘public policy’, because of their unacceptable content, purpose, or consequences. This is the classical question of freedom of contract, which can be rephrased, to a large extent, in contemporary terms of ‘commodification’ and, for the European Union, as the question of the moral limits to the internal market.

scholarly journals A Step Forward in the Harmonization of European Jurisdiction: Regulation Brussels I Recast

2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 159-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alavi Hamed ◽  
Khamichonak Tatsiana
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Brussels Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legislative Framework ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement

Abstract The Brussels regime is a legislative framework that regulates questions of transnational litigation in the European Union. Having been initially shaped upon negotiation of the 1968 Brussels Convention, it has been subsequently superseded and expanded in scope by the Brussels I Regulation on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, alongside other instruments addressing specific areas of law. Recently, the Brussels regime has been amended by the Recast Brussels I Regulation, which entered into force on January 15, 2015, bringing about significant and long-awaited change. Addressing the experience of application of its predecessors, the changes in the Recast Regulation have been introduced to the treatment of choice-of-court agreements and their relationship with the lis pendens doctrine, abolition of exequatur, reaffirmation and clarification of the arbitration exclusion, as well as further minor amendments.

Развитие института взаимного признания и исполнения судебных решений в странах Европейского Союза

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 71-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Maystrovich ◽  
Elena Kucheryavaya
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Mutual Trust ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Right

The free movement of judicial decisions on the territory of the European Union presupposes a high level of mutual trust between the judicial bodies of the Member States. From the citizens’ point of view, the key issue is the balance between the rights of the plaintiffs and the defendants, i.e. the right to access to justice (to sue) and the right to defence. Mutual trust between the judiciary can be built in various ways. Firstly, through the creation of a unified European procedure in the form of additional tools held before the adjudication and based on the general rules of procedure. Secondly, through sectoral harmonisation of procedural law within the framework of solving individual issues in accordance with a step-by-step approach. Thirdly, it is necessary to create common standards, in the form of principles and rules, regulations and directives. The Author in this article analyses the main ways of creating uniformity of norms applied in the territory of the European Union, the most suitable for the institution of mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments. The process of legal development of the institution of mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments and its current status are considered.

scholarly journals Choice-of-court Agreements in the E-commerce International Contracts

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anabela Susana de Sousa Gonçalves
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
Commerce International

The choice-of-court agreements are a common practice in the e commerce international contracts. In the European Union, the choice-of-courts agreements find their legal framework in Article 25 of Regulation No. 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 12 December 2012, on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (Brussels I bis). The purpose of this paper is to analyse the current legal framework, in the European Union, of the jurisdiction agreements in international contracts concluded in e commerce, comparing it to the previous one, and taking into consideration the interpretative options of the European Union Court of Justice (ECJ).

21. The 1996 Hague Convention on the Protection of Children

2021 ◽  
pp. 798-812
Author(s):  
N V Lowe ◽  
G Douglas ◽  
E Hitchings ◽  
R Taylor
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Parental Responsibility ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Different Cultures

Many relationships are now transnational ones between parties from different cultures and countries. The breakdown of these relationships means that increasing numbers of children are caught up in cross-border disputes. Such disputes raise a variety of issues, including which court should hear any question concerning the children’s upbringing, what happens if each parent brings separate proceedings at the same time, and about the enforceability of orders, for example that a parent living in one country should see their child in another country. Now that the UK has left the European Union the key international instrument for dealing with these issues is the 1996 Hague Convention on the Protection of Children which provides basic rules of jurisdiction for hearing cases concerning children and a consequential system of recognition and enforcement of decisions concerning parental responsibility. This chapter discusses the following aspects of the 1996 Convention: its aims, scope, the jurisdictional rules, applicable law with regard to parental responsibility, recognition and enforcement, the placement of children abroad and safeguarding rights of access.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document