Search

Cross-border litigation over standard essential patents (SEPs) entered a new phase when the English courts decided in Unwired Planet v Huawei that they have the power to set the terms of a global license within the context of national patent infringement proceedings. Unwired Planet appears to have unleashed a global race to the bottom and a race to the courthouse, with litigants racing to seize their preferred forum to set global rates while trying to prevent their opponents from bringing proceedings elsewhere through ‘anti-suit injunctions’, a type of relief traditionally granted by common law jurisdictions but now increasingly by civil law jurisdictions such as China. Yet this is rarely the end of the matter, with litigants applying for anti-anti-suit injunctions or even anti-anti-anti-suit injunctions. The purpose of this paper is to explore the new realities in SEP litigation post-Unwired Planet, with a focus on the use of anti-suit injunctions and the corresponding turf war between national courts. After discussing the legal test for granting such relief in various legal systems, the paper discusses the worrying proliferation of anti-suit injunctions across major jurisdictions, noting how this trend wastes judicial resources and may undermine international comity. It considers that in the absence of some form of international coordination, a satisfactory solution is unlikely to emerge in the short term. As a first step, it proposes that governments consider establishing ‘best practices’ for SEP licensing dispute resolution, including for jurisdictional issues such as the scope of licenses fashioned by national courts.

Der Beitrag widmet sich den Argumentationsstrategien in der Debatte über das föderale Krisenmanagement in der Covid-19-Pandemie. Im Mittelpunkt steht die Frage, inwiefern die landespolitischen Akteure die bundesstaatliche Ordnung als Gelegenheitsstruktur in dieser Debatte für opportunistische Argumentationsstrategien nutzen oder im Sinne des bundesfreundlichen Verhaltens auf kooperative, solidarische Normen rekurrieren. Für die empirische Analyse wurden die Landtagsdebatten über 202 Regierungserklärungen und Unterrichtungen der Landesregierungen zwischen Februar 2020, als die ersten Covid-19-Infektionen in Deutschland registriert wurden, und der Bundestagswahl am 26. September 2021 inhaltsanalytisch kodiert und ausgewertet. Der Datensatz umfasst 4.360 kodierte Textstellen. Die Befunde veranschaulichen zum einen parteipolitische Unterschiede, die sich nicht nur auf den Gegensatz zwischen Regierung und Opposition zurückführen lassen. Zum anderen weisen die Daten darauf hin, dass die Normen des bundesfreundlichen Verhaltens - auch in der Krise und trotz der Wahlkämpfe - opportunistische Argumentationsstrategien einhegen, jedoch nicht verhindern, und ihre Wirksamkeit mit abnehmender Unterstützung der Eindämmungsmaßnahmen durch die Bevölkerung nachlässt. This contribution focuses on the discursive strategies in the political debate on the federal management of the Covid-19 crisis in Germany. It scrutinizes the extent to which sub-national actors make use of federal structures to pursue opportunistic discursive strategies and how they refer to the cooperative, solidary norms of "comity" (Bundestreue). For the empirical analysis, the study draws on parliamentary debates in the 16 regional parliaments in Germany and analyzes which arguments the speakers use to legitimize the measures against Covid-19. The arguments are captured through a novel dataset that contains 4,360 statements made in 202 parliamentary debates between February 2020 and September 2021. The data reveal partisan differences that cannot be solely reduced to the government-opposition divide. The analysis shows that while norms of comity inherent in cooperative federalism can constrain opportunistic strategies, they do not prevent them - especially when the public support of the measures against Covid-19 declines.

Public funded research and inventions play a central role in stimulating innovation in any country. Last year, the Government of India stealthily notified the Draft Model Guidelines on Implementation of IPR Policy for Academic Institutions. The Draft guidelines aim to provide a structure embedded in IPR for commercializing university inventions. They prioritise IPR over other methods of technology transfer from the academia to the industry. The draft guidelines put India in an elite comity of fast-developing and developed nations which have a similar policy framework in place. But is the spirit of collegiality a reason good enough by itself to embrace a policy? The article comprehensively analyses the draft guidelines, their purported rationale and consequences that their enforcement would entail. The article presents an Indian perspective against the backdrop of the American and English experience, with their respective academic institution's IP Policy frameworks, in an endeavour to extract tangible lessons for India. It is argued that with all the pious intentions with which the Draft Guidelines have been brought, they are misplaced, inapt and ill-judged. This is a post-print version of the published article. The article published in the journal can be accessed at: DOI: 10.1111/jwip.12181

이 논문은 중세 로마 가톨릭교회의 지역분할이 개신교의 선교지 분할 정책에 어떤 영향을 미쳤는지를 살펴본다. 1493년 교황은 신대륙 개척에 앞장섰던 가톨릭의 해양 강국인 스페인과 포르투갈 국왕에게 식민지 개척과 식민지에 선교할 권한과 임무를 부여해주었다. 또한 교황은 전 세계를 두 지역으로 분할하여 스페인과 포르투갈에게 나누어 주었다. 교황이 스페인과 포르투갈의 국왕에게 부여한 임무와 권한이 선교보호권(patronato real)이다. 보호권을 부여받은 포르투갈과 스페인의 국왕은 처음에는 선교 임무를 성실히 수행하였으나 이후 선교사업을 제대로 수행하지 못했다. 이러한 상황을 해결하기 위해 교황청은 1622년 포교성성(Propaganda Fide)을 설립하고 가톨릭의 여러 선교 종단 내의 갈등과 분쟁을 해결, 조정하고 보다 효과적으로 선교하기 위해 위임권(jus commissionis)을 부여해 주었다. 즉 선교지를 선점한 선교종단에게 그 지역에서 독점적으로 선교할 수 있는 특별권한을 부여해주었고, 후발 선교종단은 선점한 선교종단의 동의 없이는 그 선교지역에 들어가서 사역할 수 없도록 하였다. 로마 가톨릭교회의 이러한 선교정책과 방법은 개신교 선교에 많은 영향을 끼치는데, 그 중에 지역 분할, 선교보호권과 위임권은 개신교 선교정책에 직접적인 영향을 주게 된다. 19세기 중반부터 20세기 초엽에 이르기까지 개신교의 주요 교단 선교부가 참여한 선교지역 분할협정(comity agreements)은 가톨릭교회의 포교성성이 수립하고 시행한 선교방법을 그대로 모방한 대표적인 정책이라고 평가할 수 있다. 로마 가톨릭과 개신교 선교에서 행해진 선교지 분할과 선교위임권 인정을 통한 선교 협력의 전통은 오늘날 다른 선교부의 선교지역에 들어가 갈등과 분쟁을 야기하는 한국교회의 선교행태에 커다란 교훈과 도전을 준다. 남의 터에 들어가서 선교활동을 해서는 안되기 때문이다.

This article contrasts the territorial unboundedness of company law, arising from ‘comity’, with the territorial constraint imposed on tax law i.e. ‘the revenue rule’. ‘Comity’ is found to be a judicial fig-leaf disguising a form of corporate sovereignty arising from the fact that economic relations are always already constituted through the corporate form before any scrutiny of their ontology. This observation is developed into a theory of ‘offshore’. The prevailing view of offshore is that the state bifurcates its sovereignty to create juridical spaces where international capital is relieved of local tax/regulatory regimes. This article seeks to underpin that view with an analysis whereby corporate capital and state sovereignty are rival species of property regime, existing in a state of mutual antagonism. On this view offshore is the juridical space, manifesting itself through the aforementioned bifurcations, where the company is sovereign over the state rather than vice-versa.

This study aims to investigate Shakespeares The Merchant of Venice in light of the application of Leechs politeness maxims. The study uses a qualitative method in analyzing the utterances of the major characters in the play; Shylock, Antonio and Bassanio, since most of the events within the play focus on their demands, personalities and behaviors. The purpose of this study is to reveal the degree of politeness reflected in the characters speeches. 17 extracts from Act 1 scene 3 (a street in Venice) and 6 extracts from Act 4 scene 1 (the court scene) are explored due to their importance in the plot development. In light of the analysis, some of the factors are highlighted according to their significant role in determining the use of politeness or impoliteness strategies. These factors are power, psychological aspects, personal values, irony principle, social status and religion. The study also examines the way in which the six maxims are employed in the extracts. To conclude, politeness strategies can be used to reveal much about peoples identities, values and psychology.

When a sovereign state vouches for the anti-competitive behaviour of its producers, it is incumbent upon the courts to abstain from adjudicating and allow economic diplomacy to take its course. The recent decision of the US Supreme Court on a cartel case involving Chinese exporters of vitamin C appears to favour pro-active judicial enforcement of antitrust law, however. Comity among nations calls for giving due deference to the legitimate choices of others with respect to regulating competition in their own industries. But a state harmed by the anti-competitive conduct of foreign producers faces the difficult choice between protecting its own interest and avoiding intrusion into the conduct of another sovereign state. This paper explores this conundrum, which has implications on states with a development agenda that subordinates competition to industrial goals. JEL classification: L52, F1

In contemporary societies, governance is becoming governance by experts or under expert advice. This paper offers a survey of the basic conceptual schema that underlies some legal and political use...

This Article addresses and critiques the case for state-level legislative bans on courts citing “Islamic law” or the law of Muslim-majority countries. In particular, the Article reviews the most substantive evidence adduced by the bans’ supporters, in the form of a set of state court cases published by the Center for Security Policy (CSP). Very few of these cases, in fact, show courts actually applying Islamic or foreign law, and in none of these cases would the various forms of proposed legislation have been likely to alter the result. Thus even this report does not suggest a need for the state laws purporting to ban sharīʿa. The Article thus argues that even if these bans are not unconstitutionally discriminatory in their effect, they are ineffective at achieving their claimed purpose. This Article was originally published as an Occasional Paper in the Harvard Papers in Islamic Law series in 2018.

Abou-Nigm, V.R. & Noodt Taquela, M.B. (eds.), Diversity and Integration in Private International Law (2019). Allen, S., Costelloe, D., Fitzmaurice, M., Gragl, P. & Guntrip, E., The Oxford Handbook of Jurisdiction in International Law (2019). Amaral, G.R., Judicial Precedent and Arbitration—Are Arbitrators Bound by Judicial Precedent? A Comparative Study of UK, US and Brazilian Law and Practice (2d ed. 2018). Amtenbrink, F., Davies, G., Kochenov, D. & Lindeboom J. (eds.), The Internal Market and the Future of European Integration: Essays in Honour of Laurence W. Gormley (2019). Andenas, M. & Fairgrieve, D., Courts and Comparative Law (2019). Athanassiou, L.I., Maritime Cross-Border Insolvency: Under...

This article critically examined the complexities that abound in Nigeria’s Foreign Policy under the final three military administrations of Generals Ibrahim Babangida, Sani Abacha, and Abdulsalami Abubakar, before the transition to democratic rule in 1999. It adopted a novel approach by identifying and intricately examining a distinct pattern of contortion evinced in Nigeria’s foreign policy during this epoch. It contended that although Nigeria’s foreign policy had historically been somewhat knotty at varying points in time, this period in its foreign policy and external relations was especially marked by tortuousness and a somewhat back and forth agenda. This began in 1985 with the Babangida administration, whose foreign policy posture initially seemed commendable, only for political debacles to mar it. An exacerbation of this downslide in foreign policy occurred under the Abacha regime, whereby the country obtained pariah status among the comity of nations. Subsequently, a revitalisation occurred under General Abubakar, who deviated from what had become the status quo, reinventing Nigeria’s external image and foreign policy position through his ‘restoration campaign.’ More so, following David Gray’s behavioural theory of foreign policy, this study examined how the behavioural patterns and aspirations of a minuscule cadre of decision-makers deeply affected Nigeria’s foreign policy formulation and implementation during the period under study. The findings of this study include national interest, the crux of any foreign policy, sometimes misaligned with domestic realities. In this regard, this study demonstrated how successive Nigerian governments replicated a ‘munificent’, ‘Santa Claus’ foreign policy which alienated key local developments such as economic hardship, and contributed to the tortuousness that the country’s foreign policy experienced during an era of military dictatorships in the late twentieth century. Through its findings, the study concluded by proffering recommendations to improve the country’s foreign policy, better advance her national interests– which ought to comprise the crux of her foreign policy objectives, – and help in eschewing a recurrence of past ineptitudes and errors. Key Words: Foreign policy, military rule, Nigeria, behavioural theory

There has always been considerable uncertainty about the nature and scope of the rule by which contractual performance is excused if illegal in the place of performance, even though performance would not be illegal by the contract's governing law. This article revisits the so-called “Ralli Bros rule” and looks at how the scope of the rule has been developed and its nature misunderstood. It argues that the rule is neither a choice of law rule nor part of the rules discharging a contract for frustration but is instead a public policy rule favouring judicial abstention for reasons of comity. This has implications for how the rule interacts with the choice of law rules for contracts under the Rome Convention and the Rome I Regulation.

This article explores the challenges of the extraterritorial application of the right to be forgotten and, more broadly, of EU data protection law in light of the recent case law of the ECJ. The paper explains that there are good arguments for the EU to apply its high data protection standards outside its borders, but that such an extraterritorial application faces challenges, as it may clash with duties of international comity, legal diversity, or contrasting rulings delivered by courts in other jurisdictions. As the article points out from a comparative perspective, the protection of privacy in the digital age increasingly exposes a tension between efforts by legal systems to impose their high standards of data protection outside their borders – a dynamic which could be regarded as ‘imperialist’ – and claims by other legal systems to assert their own power over data – a dynamic which one could name ‘sovereigntist’. As the article suggests, navigating between the Scylla of imperialism and the Charybdis of sovereigntism will not be an easy task. In this context, greater convergence in the data protection framework of liberal democratic systems worldwide appears as the preferable path to secure privacy in the digital age.

This paper surveys the myriad challenges that confront and frustrate the fulfillment of Nigeria’s diplomatic visions and missions overseas. There is a wide-spread understanding and acceptance that Nigeria’s foreign and diplomatic missions operate below expectation. This is more so when comparisonis made between Nigeria’s diplomatic performance and those of the developed and well-ordered societies of the world. Nigeria’s foreign policy through its missions abroad is expected to improve the lots of its citizens living overseas, bring the country’s national and domestic interests to the stage of actualization, and project the country’s image as good before the comity of nations etc. To these expectations, the Nigerian state and its diplomacy leave much to be desired. Among other explanations for this failure of diplomacy are infiltration of the diplomatic profession by non-careerists who by their unprofessionalism, have shown to be foreigners in the foreign service; wanton corruption by the political class which frustrates foreign services; inadequacy of financial resources needed for role performance leading to embarrassments and difficulty in the timely payments of bills etc. The paper concludes that it is both imperative and compelling for the executive government of Nigeria to wake up to these challenges as a matter of urgency, if Nigeria must play an active role that befits its status in international affairs.

Regulatory rules are omnipresent today. Increasingly, they also influence private rights and obligations, from employment contracts to competition law and data protection. Private international law...

This article focuses on the ways in which investment tribunals constituted under intra- EU BITS and the Energy Charter Treaty (in an intra-EU dispute) have reacted to the Court of Justice’s Achmea judgment of 6 March 2018. The first part of the article maps out the existing intra-EU arbitrations in which the issues arising from Achmea appear in one form or another. We then take a critical look at how the disputing parties have used Achmea in their argumentation and how the investment tribunals have dismissed these arguments and upheld their jurisdiction. The second part of the article is analytical. When the tribunals uphold their jurisdiction and decide on the merits, they knowingly deliver an award, which is unenforceable in the Respondent State and the entirety of the EU. By drawing parallels with decisions rendered by other international tribunals, we argue that the rendering of potentially unenforceable awards is not specific to intra-EU investment disputes. We then look at why international tribunals render potentially unenforceable awards. The third part of the article presents several suggestions of how intra-EU investment tribunals should tackle the Achmea conundrum, either by declining their jurisdiction pursuant to judicial comity or upholding their jurisdiction but dismissing the cases as inadmissible.