Search

The Hague Conference on Private International Law (hereinafter - "Conference") has played a pivotal role in the development and unification of jurisdictional rules in private international law. This paper examines the outcomes of the Conference various conventions, focusing on their impact on harmonizing jurisdictional frameworks among member states. By analyzing key conventions, such as the 1965 Hague Convention on Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents, the 1970 Hague Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters, and the 2005 Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements, this research highlights how these instruments address conflicts of laws and jurisdictional disputes in cross-border cases. The paper further explores the challenges faced in implementing these conventions, including differing national interpretations and the influence of domestic legal systems on international agreements. Through comparative analysis, it evaluates the effectiveness of these conventions in reducing forum shopping and ensuring more predictable outcomes for parties involved in international disputes. Moreover, this study reflects on the future prospects for further unification of jurisdiction rules, considering emerging trends such as globalization, digitalization, and the increasing complexity of cross-border legal issues. The research aims to contribute to the discourse on private international law by providing insights into the Conference achievements and identifying areas where further efforts are needed to enhance the coherence and effectiveness of jurisdictional rules. Ultimately, the findings underscore the significance of international cooperation in resolving jurisdictional challenges and advancing the uniform application of private international law principles. The success of the Hague Conference, however, hinges not only on the adoption of conventions but also on the degree to which states integrate these instruments into their domestic legal frameworks. Inconsistencies in ratification and divergent national practices often dilute the intended harmonization, creating gaps in enforcement and legal uncertainty. Some major economies have yet to ratify key conventions, limiting their global reach and diminishing the benefits of predictability and uniformity. These obstacles highlight the need for stronger mechanisms to monitor and encourage compliance, along with the development of flexible frameworks that can accommodate diverse legal traditions while still promoting convergence. Enhanced dialogue among member states and targeted technical assistance could foster broader participation, ensuring that the potential of the Conference's conventions is fully realized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article highlights the problem of historical aspects of the emergence of private international law through the prism of a comparative analysis of the ancient and medieval periods of its development. Factors that influenced the emergence and historical development of international private law at this time are analyzed in detail. We have analyzed the circumstances and consequences of the birth of international private law in the ancient period of historical development. The process of legal development of Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome was accompanied by intensive political-diplomatic, socio-economic and civilizational contacts within the entire Mediterranean region, as well as a number of other regions. The flourishing of the cultural, political and economic life of Ancient Greece in the 5th century. to n. gave rise to rapid progress in the legal indicators of the ancient Greek political system. In turn, Ancient Rome continued to unite the Mediterranean region into a single entity from the point of view of the communication system, large-scale trade operations, and cultural influence. The author defends the opinion, developing the available historiographical assessments, about the justified nature of the point of view regarding the existence of historical origins of international private law not in the Middle Ages, but specifically in the period of antiquity. Additional confirmation of this point of view can be served by the fact that it was in the period of antiquity that the so-called Latin formulas «binding» became already known. This is manifested, among other things, in the concept of «conflict of laws», as well as a number of other legal formulas. The trend of the further development of private international law against the background of the decline and subsequent disintegration of the Roman Empire is followed. The gradual spread of Roman law took place in all Italian states, which led to the further development of elements of private international law. The emergence of legal conflicts in the process of the collision of Italian legal realities with Roman legal realities led to the process of adapting the corpus juris civilis to Italian legal practice. Conclusions are made about the emergence of the main indicators of private international law precisely in the era of antiquity, that the medieval stage of the development of private international law borrowed ancient traditions and adapted them to the realities of the development of its time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In her new book, The Law's Ultimate Frontier: Towards an Ecological Jurisprudence—A Global Horizon in Private International Law , Horatia Muir Watt proclaims a new vision of legality: an ecological jurisprudence. Its originality lies in the role played by private international law as a tool for legal and political imagination in the Anthropocene. I first present carefully the whole argument as Muir Watt offers it. Then I turn to a critical examination of the work and show how the book fits a much broader intellectual landscape that aims to do justice to the natural and cultural 'Other' and how, despite all its sophistication and erudition, the Levinasian grounds, conflict of law's genealogy, planetary ontology and amateur bricolage she builds upon to establish a novel jurisprudence raise as many complications as achievements. Ultimately, and as a general lesson for holistic and multidisciplinary theorising about law, this article identifies some crucial choices any future model of legality combining both a theory of justice and a vision of law as a linking device needs to overcome in order to ensure we can deal simultaneously with the divergent local and planetary dimensions summoned by the threat of extinction without hastily replacing morality for law and politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is indicated that international private-law relations nowadays are expanding significantly primarily in connection with the internationalization of economic life. The modern world is characterized by the economic interdependence of states, the expansion of not only traditional forms of foreign economic relations, but also relatively new forms such as leasing operations, concessions, franchising, and others. The article examines the current trends in the development of state immunity in international private law relations, in particular, in investment relations. The author defines the scope of these relations and gives their general characteristics, as well as identifies the peculiarities of the State’s participation in these relations as a subject of private international law. The author examines the content, types of international investment relations, development trends and peculiarities of legal regulation. The author pays special attention to the jurisdictional issues of investment dispute resolution involving states. The author analyzes legal acts and shows the role of judicial practice in this area. The author substantiates the need to apply functional (limited) immunity in international private law relations. Expansion of the range of international private legal relations over time due to the development of foreign economic activity, integration processes, and interdependence of States in the second half of the twentieth century contributed to the expansion of State participation in civil (private) relations, which objectively led to the establishment of the concept of functional (limited) immunity in the legislative, judicial and contractual practice of different countries. The concept of limited immunity is becoming increasingly popular in the world, which is explained by the development of economic relations between different countries and the increasing involvement of states in commercial activities, which on their own behalf enter into various foreign trade agreements, obtain loans from foreign banks, use maritime transport for commercial purposes, i.e. by their actions they seem to put themselves in the position of a merchant, trader, private person, which then allows the courts to consider them as ordinary participants in the process. The current policy vector of most continental law states on immunity issues is shifting towards the use of limited immunity of states. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Regrettably, the triple global catastrophe of pollution, natural loss, and climate change coexists with the global socioeconomic problems of poverty and inequality. Temperatures are increasing at an unprecedented rate; biodiversity is disappearing swiftly, with potentially dire consequences for all of us; and pollution is becoming a global issue, killing millions of people annually and continuing to worsen. There is no normative vacuum in which the 169 targets and 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were born or placed. They are based on international law and designed to be compliant with the commitments made in a number of soft law instruments and international agreements. There is, of course, a connection between international law and the SDGs. What kind of relationship do they have? How much and how may the SDGs and international law complement one another to improve systems integration .In an effort to leverage the relationship for global sustainability, this paper investigates these issues from two angles. First, do the SDGs play a key role in bringing together different international organizations to work toward the ultimate goal of sustainable development? Most international institutions function in relative isolation and may pursue conflicting interests since they are engrossed in their respective mandates and goals. Goal-setting, as a governance technique to prioritize, motivate, and provide direction, has been proposed by some observers as a way to improve the overall performance of current institutions in fostering sustainable development. Insofar as providing consistency to an otherwise divergent and even inconsistent set of institutional arrangements, how effective are the SDGs likely to be? Second, is it conceivable that international law will aid in the integrated implementation of the SDGs? The SDGs themselves have come under fire for lacking consistency, even though they pride themselves on being “integrated and indivisible. This is a problem since the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) experience has demonstrated that achieving these governance goals on their own could have unforeseen consequences. While certain MDG targets were achieved, the MDGs’ spirit was not. Then, despite its fragmented structure, how and to what degree may international law integrate the SDGs and aims and aid in the achievement of long-term sustainable development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article provides a scientific and practical analysis of international legal aspects relating to the issue of determining the exclusive jurisdiction of a dispute by means of a choice of court agreement, which is quite relevant, since the ratification of the relevant Convention, which was signed in 2014, took place during the martial law regime, which complicates the process of implementing the provisions of the Convention in the Ukrainian legal system. The author analyses the current Ukrainian legislation in the area of determining the jurisdiction of private law relations with a foreign element, in particular, proceedings in cases related to the jurisdiction determination procedure, and international documents in the area of choice of court agreements, such as the Laws of Ukraine «On International Private Law», «On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine in connection with the Ratification of the Convention on Choice of Court Agreements», the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements and the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. The author identifies certain problems of enforcement of the choice of court agreement in the judicial system of Ukraine and issues of procedural protection of the parties to the agreement. It is noted that currently there is no definition of an exclusive choice of court agreement in national legislation and there are problems in the enforcement of a Ukrainian court decision by other states where no agreement on legal assistance has been concluded. The difficulty of applying the Convention on Choice of Court Agreements in comparison with the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards has been proven, which may lead to differences in the practice of use among the countries that are parties to the Convention. The author identifies the need to expand Article 4-1 of the Law of Ukraine «On Private International Law» and improve the implementation of disputes involving an exclusive choice of court agreement. The author emphasises the need to resolve problematic issues, as this will positively affect the international legal image of the state and prepare further legislative changes for more effective synthesis of the legal systems of Ukraine and the EU member states. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on the court case City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, where the Supreme Court ruled that a city ordinance criminalizing encampments by the involuntarily homeless does not violate the Eighth Amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause. Topics include the intersection of homelessness and the Eighth Amendment, the Court's interpretation of status versus conduct in criminal laws, and the implications of local government autonomy in addressing homelessness.

It is noted that non-contractual obligations belong to the sphere of regulation of national and international law. It is emphasized that most of the norms of civil legislation in European countries are devoted to the grounds and conditions for the emergence of binding legal relations. Noncontractual obligations are described as a group of legal obligations. The authors observe that, despite the diversity, non-contractual obligations are not sufficiently regulated at the international level and little researched in the scientific community. The goal of the scientific research is relevant, which consists in the analysis of the norms of private international law in Europe and the principles that regulate the sphere of noncontractual obligations, the characteristics of the main methods of conflict resolution in the international legislation of European countries, and the establishment of the significance of the process of unification of the norms of private international law at the level of EU legislation. It has been established that non-contractual obligations are distinguished from contractual obligations by the fact that it is impossible to predict all the reasons for their occurrence, because they arise without an agreement or contract between the parties entering into them. The fact that noncontractual obligations are considered to be the oldest type of legal relationship enshrined in law is emphasized, because one of the reasons for their occurrence is torts. In modern legal regulations, two types of non-contractual obligations are distinguished: delict obligations and quasi-delicts. The list of grounds for the occurrence of noncontractual obligations, which are regulated in the legislation of foreign countries and Ukraine, is given. The authors' attention is focused on the problem of conflicts of norms of international law regarding the regulation of non-contractual obligations, which arises as a result of the fact that the institution of non-contractual obligations has developed over the centuries in each country individually in accordance with its legal customs and social norms. A characterization of the main bindings or attachment formulas was carried out, which help, on the basis of certain legal grounds, to determine the extent of the right of one or another state to regulate social relations in the presence of certain conflicts. It is emphasized that the lack of a single procedure for resolving conflicts regarding non-negotiable obligations in international law caused the process of unification of international norms in this area, but in Europe this process started relatively recently, and suffered several failures. It was concluded that today there is no clear unified system of legal norms regulating non-contractual obligations, unlike contractual ones. Such important documents as: DCFR, EU Regulation No. 864/2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II Regulation) and Principles of European Tort Law formed by the European Tort Law Group were considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This paper aims to determine the adaptability of China's legal system in recognizing and enforcing foreign judgements in China. Design/methodology/approach: Academic articles, case law and books are examined as are relevant reports by various regulatory authorities and organizations. Findings: Historically, Chinese courts have strictly adhered to "de facto reciprocity", which made it difficult for foreign judgements to be recognized and enforced in China. Fortunately, Chinese courts have since abandoned their rigid adherence to de facto reciprocity, and have instead, used flexible tests of reciprocity such as de jure reciprocity, reciprocal commitment and reciprocal understand/consensus. Accordingly, this would facilitate the recovery of stolen assets, as there is a lower threshold for the recognition and enforcement of a foreign judgement. Research limitations/implications: There are limited data available in relation to the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgements pertaining to the recovery of stolen assets. Any discussions within this paper are based on the impressionistic observations of this author, which may not reflect the true state of affairs within the Belt and Road Initiative. Practical implications: Those who are interested in examining the viability in recognizing and enforcing foreign judgements relating to stolen assets will have an interest in this topic. Originality/value: The value of the paper is to demonstrate the difficulties in recognizing and enforcing foreign judgements in China in relation to stolen assets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study evaluates the impact of intermunicipal cooperation on public procurement (PP) performance, based on the Italian experience. We use both a fixed-effects regression model and alternative matching estimators to analyse a sample of 50,905 Italian public works contracts awarded by municipalities and municipal unions (MUs) between 2012 and 2020. Our results indicate that while local centralisation does not necessarily lead to significant cost savings in the procurement phase, MUs outperform individual municipalities in the execution phase, especially in terms of reducing delivery delays. We conclude that while MUs do not necessarily lead to strong economies of scale, they do improve efficiency during contract execution. This highlights the alternative benefits of PP centralisation beyond cost savings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Taiwan Law Review is the property of Angle Publishing Co., Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Taiwan Law Review is the property of Angle Publishing Co., Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article discusses the deportation of Syrian refugees from Lebanon and Turkey between 2017 and 2024. It attempts to bring light on the experiences of these refugees facing forced returns, emphasising the human consequences and complicated causes underlying such actions. The purpose of this article is to raise awareness about the deportation of Syrian refugees and the urgent need for collective action to address this humanitarian disaster and preserve the lives of vulnerable individuals affected by forced repatriation. Using the descriptive analytical approach, this article investigates the legislative frameworks and international commitments that should safeguard refugees from forced repatriation. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (udhr), The 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol and rules of International Humanitarian Law will be used as a standard for the definition and legal framework of refugee’s rights. The article dives into the obstacles that host countries confront, including as social, economic, and political pressures. It also emphasises the necessity of advocacy activities and protective measures to defend Syrian refugees’ rights and well-being. The findings of the article are expected to benefit Syrian refugees and raise awareness about their situation, which will contribute preserve their lives and well-being. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Overriding Mandatory Rules (OMR), which claim to be applied regardless of the application of conflict of laws rules, are a widely used yet relatively new concept in the legal literature that has not been thoroughly examined from the perspective of private international law. Due to the fact that international commercial arbitration has become the main forum for resolving contractual disputes, from a theoretical perspective, it is necessary to clarify the approach of arbitration bodies to the issue of OMR and complete the research literature of this field. From a practical perspective, due to Iran's exposure to multiple examples of OMR in international commercial disputes (such as rules on sanctions, consumer protection, competition law, and currency control), understanding the limits of the applicability of OMR, especially third-country, can help to protect national interests of Iran in these disputes. In this study, using a descriptive-analytical research method, library and internet sources related to the subject were reviewed with an emphasis on arbitral awards. The findings of the study indicate that third-country OMR are generally applied with stricter standards than OMR of the governing law, based on conflict of laws analyses and arbitrator's duty to render a binding award. In contrast, the non-application of third-country OMR in arbitration practice has occured due to several reasons: the lack of adherence by arbitrators to conflict of laws rules, the lack of a close connection between the OMR and the dispute, the non-superiority of the goals provided by the OMR over those of the law of the place of arbitration, the facts of the case not falling within the scope of application of OMR, the unacceptable effects and results of applying the OMR, and in some cases, the relevance of OMR to purely national economic and political interests (type of OMR). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Taiwan Law Review is the property of Angle Publishing Co., Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article reviews two books by Professor Stefan Talmon, titled "German Practice in International Law" for the years 2019 and 2020. These books are the first English presentation of German practice in international law and aim to make German practices more widely accessible and studied. The books cover a wide range of German practice in public international law, providing background information and critical commentary, and are a valuable resource for understanding Germany's official positions on international law issues. The project is an academic endeavor led by Professor Talmon and students, offering a unique perspective on State practice in international law. [Extracted from the article]

Under the common banner of a search for a 'more rational' approach to choice of law, US conflict‐of‐laws scholars of the late 1950s and the 1960s produced an impressive array of new technical instruments for their discipline. This article situates their work in the broader contexts of innovations in the social‐ and behavioural sciences and in legal‐ and political theory of this period. On this contextual reading, the methodological clashes of the so‐called 'choice‐of‐law revolution' change in shape and become part of a much larger story – one with relevance also outside the discipline and beyond the United States. That story is about different degrees of faith in the capacities of technical instruments and practices, like legal doctrine, to manage and resolve conflict, by making disparate factors commensurable, and by affording outcomes that optimise all competing interests in play. By revisiting these mid‐century battles over conflicts methods in light of contemporaneous understandings of 'rationality' and 'legitimacy' in other fields, the article contributes to our understanding of the genealogy of post‐war choice of law, as well as of the history of these ideals – and their technical means – in modern legal thought. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is determined that the process of cooperation within the framework of the European Union has increased the need for identification and exchange of legal information coming from regional and national authorities at the European level. This need is partially met by digitally accessible legal information and the widespread use of the Internet. However, the exchange of legal information is largely limited by the differences that exist in different national legal systems, as well as the differences in their technical systems used to store and display the law on their respective websites. This hinders interaction between the information systems of national and European institutions, despite the increase in the availability of documents in electronic format. At the same time, the interconnection of national and international legal information from various sources and their presentation in the form of linked data of legal knowledge will undoubtedly improve the process of searching for legal information, expanding the possibilities of inquiries that are not currently possible. Moreover, in an increasingly digital society, where the number of cross-border civil and criminal proceedings is rapidly increasing, and given the complex diversity of different legal systems in the EU Member States, the simplification and facilitation of cross-border judicial cooperation is essential to ensure effective access of citizens and businesses to justice. At the same time, the system of identification and metadata should be well known to citizens and specialists in the field of law. In addition, to increase the chances of finding case law that is supported by an identifier and metadata, these court decisions should be searchable - by identifier and a minimal set of metadata - through a common interface. The exchange of digital evidence in the EU is also an important aspect. Currently, countries cooperate using private international law in cross-border criminal cases and exchange digital evidence based on these tools. The choice of tool depends on the countries involved and the type of information required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the relationship between parental responsibility as a measure of protection of children's rights and Private International Law on the example of the application of parental responsibility measures to Ukrainians in EU countries. The purpose of the article is to provide a legal analysis of the problem of removal of children from Ukrainian families by social services in the EU countries as a measure of parental responsibility. In the example of the analysis of the national legislation of Spain, Poland, Sweden, Germany and Finland, the differences in the legal regulation of parental responsibility are considered. The most pressing issues that arise when initiating a case on parental responsibility of persons enjoying temporary protection in the EU countries have been identified. The methodological basis of the research is: dialectical method, comparative legal method, method of legal analysis. It has been established that in most cases the removal of children from families as a measure of parental responsibility was applied based on improper performance of parental duties, but there are cases when such measures were of a preventive nature. The need to improve the legal regulation of parental responsibility in the legislation of Ukraine has been identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, the authors examine claims under mandatory law and describe how they are treated in jurisdictions other than where they arise. They then analyze the effect of choice-of-law provisions on mandatory law. Finally, the authors explore how mandatory law may be treated by arbitrators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conflict of laws in the cyber space is a very fundamental challenge since the lack of clear demarcation in this area and ultimately the impossibility of implementing "territorial jurisdiction" - as a key factor in determining jurisdiction - leads to the application of other jurisdictional principles. When this applies to several countries and two or more states consider themselves competent to prosecute a crime, there is a "positive conflict of laws" in cyberspace. This paper examines this issue using an analytical-descriptive method, and seeks to find out what are the causes of these jurisdictional conflicts, what are their solutions and whether the establishment of rules in this field is conceivable or should the conflict be resolved on a case-by-case basis? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Will substitutes exist in many legal systems, including those of Member States of the European Union. Two of these will substitutes are deathbed gifts and contracts for the benefit of a third party upon death. Both instruments are located at the intersection of succession law and contract law and are therefore difficult to characterise for the purposes of private international law. One could either characterise them as succession instruments in the sense of the EU Succession Regulation or as contracts in the sense of the Rome I Regulation. This article analyses the different options on how to characterise these will substitutes by taking into account the wording of both Regulations, comparative analysis of the substantive law, the likelihood of adaptation and the recent judgment by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on this matter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In modern private international law (PIL), property and situs apparently go hand in hand in an established PIL monogamy to which there tends to be a collective commitment for all PIL aspects of a cross-border dispute for all PIL subcategories of property objects. This article argues that mechanistic deference to such apparent property-situs monogamy as an overarching rule in the PIL of property is not only misconceived; but is positively impeding progress in the modern PIL debates surrounding property rights in modern decentralised objects such as bitcoin. It therefore examines the discrete justifications for the situs rules to show that the apparent property-situs monogamy is actually the cumulative effect of a wide variety of situation-specific considerations in what is really a property-situs situationship. Hence, from an analysis of the situs rules, and the principles underpinning international jurisdiction and applicable law more generally, it suggests alternative property PIL solutions to the intractable problems posed by decentralised phenomena based on policy considerations rather than continued focus on the property object itself as the "natural seat" of a property relationship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Environmental & Social Management Journal / Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental is the property of Environmental & Social Management Journal and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper's goal is to examine the scope of international regulations that cover multinational corporations' (MNCs) activities that harm the environment and quality control as it relates to environmental impact. The article's first section explores the murky legal status of MNCs and looks at the restrictions that host state agreements and international agreements place on their operations. The second section highlights the main flaw in cross-border litigation by focusing on jurisdiction and choice of law issues. The conclusion then discusses how effectively international law holds MNCs accountable for their environmental actions. Multinational corporations can lower prices and boost global consumer purchasing power by producing identical goods at lower costs. Direct financial investment abroad and job creation in those nations' local economies are two additional advantages. Multinational corporations (MNCs), in particular, have a significant impact on climate change. According to a 2014 study, among the 90 "carbon majors" responsible for significant historical anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are MNCs in the cement and fossil fuel industries. Multinational corporations contribute more pollution in nations with lax environmental laws. They pollute more abroad, usually in nations with laxer regulations, while emitting less domestically when headquartered in nations with stricter regulations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This piece of research is concerned with the manner how to solve the conflict of laws on the international electronic contract according to the Iraqi law generally, and in conformity with the Iraqi law in particular. it is to be noted that this study takes into account the concept of the international contract in general and the international electronic contract particularly. The international contract is subordinated to the law of contract i.e. the law of will or the voluntary law, according to the subjective theory of determining the applicable law. It is also subordinated to both the rigid and flexible connecting factors in accordance with the theory of objective localization of the international contract. Finally, this research studied the solution of the conflict of laws on the international electronic contract according to the Iraqi law, that is to say, the Iraqi civil law No.40 in 1951, and the Iraqi law of electronic signature and electronic bargains No. 78 in 2012. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Canadian courts treat foreign law as fact. When foreign law governs a dispute as a result of choice-of-law rules, the parties must plead and prove its contents, typically through expert testimony. The trial court assesses the evidence and applies the law, as it was proven, to the case at hand. But what happens when a litigant disagrees with the trial court's view of foreign law and appeals its decision? Appellate courts do not interfere with findings of fact unless the trial judge made a palpable and overriding error. Conversely, appellate courts are free to impose their views on questions of law. Should appellate courts defer to the trial judge or get the final word on issues of foreign law? This article addresses the disagreement between appellate courts over this issue, which the Supreme Court of Canada dodged in a recent case. It delves into the complex features of foreign law, insisting on the distinction between its evidentiary treatment (as fact) and its nature and function in litigation (as law). It makes the case for a nuanced approach to the standard of review which accounts for the many ways in which problems of foreign law present themselves to the courts. As a result, appellate courts should characterize specific questions of foreign law as questions of fact or questions of law rather than attempting to pigeon-hole foreign law itself, an abstraction capable of being both. Ultimately, correctness and deference should coexist in the appellate review of foreign law findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The OAPI member states constitute a space for the harmonization of copyright in Africa. This harmonization is yet to be completed, as attested by the conventional rules relating to the publishing contract. In addition, investigating about the publishing contract in the OAPI space requires an examination of both the text of the Bangui Agreement and that of the national laws of the 17 member states. Some differences must be pointed out keeping in mind the question of possible conflict of laws. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article deals with cases of unilateral and tacit choice of law, as less common examples of choice of law. These are entirely separate categories. Unilateral choice reflects the fact that it is the result of the will of only one person, and typically appears in unilateral legal acts (such as a financial guarantee in Czech law). Tacit choice, on the other hand, indicates that the intent to choose the law was expressed in a non-explicit way. Choice of law can be at the same time both unilateral and tacit, although this will not occur very often in practice. In the case of unilateral legal acts in the field of contract and tort law, there is a debate whether their conflict of laws regime falls under the EU’s unified conflict of laws rules (Rome I or Rome II Regulation) or under national law. There is no clear decision on the issue by the CJEU. The Czech Supreme Court has recently been given the opportunity to comment on this and some other issues of unilateral and implied choice of law. However, the Court rather missed this opportunity. It avoided the question of whether the national law or the Rome I Regulation applies to unilateral legal acts similar to a declaration of guarantee by (unfortunately incorrectly) applying the Rome Convention. The Court also applied the rules for a bilateral choice of law to an apparently unilateral choice of law in a rather complex manner. Moreover, its conclusion that the choice subjecting the declaration in question to “Danish statutes” is only an implied choice and not an express one is at least questionable. The article critically assesses this decision and shows in what respects a different (and more correct) course of action should be followed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the issues of the system of conflict of laws principles and conflict of law rules regarding the regulation of international commercial contracts, the peculiarities of their application, and the prospects for the development of the corresponding legal regulation in Ukraine. Today, conflict regulation of international commercial contracts in Ukraine is carried out using general and special models. Conceptually, this is related to the application of such conflicting principles as the «party autonomy» of the parties to the contract and the «close connection» of the applicable law with the relevant contract. The general model of conflict regulation of international commercial contracts is manifested in the application of the conflict binding «law chosen by the parties to the contract» (lex voluntatis) in accordance with the rules on the operation of the «party autonomy» principle. Today, in the legal doctrine and legislation of most countries of the world, an approach is used, according to which the parties to the contract are given the opportunity to determine the law that will regulate the relevant transaction with a foreign element. The current legislation of Ukraine on this issue generally reflects the conflict of laws rules generally accepted in international practice. However, it is necessary to improve it, taking into account the provisions of the «Principles on Choice of Law in International Commercial Contracts» (2015). The special model of conflict regulation of international commercial contracts is used in the absence of a choice of competent legal order (law) by the parties to the transaction. As a general rule, it provides for the application of conflict of law provisions, which determine the right according to the «characteristic performance» criterion. However, at the same time, a number of additional conflicting provisions have been established regarding the regulation of certain types of transactions, which are based on other criteria (place of conclusion of the contract, place of execution of the contract, location of immovable property, etc.). Today, the issue of improving these norms in accordance with «Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations» (Rome I) is relevant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reveals certain types of non-contractual obligations (NCO) in the field of private international law (PIL). The common features and differences between certain types of NCO in Ukraine and other countries of the Romano-Germanic legal family through the usage of the comparative legal method are described. The article reveals such types of obligations in PIL as: tort/delict obligations; obligations arising out of unjust enrichment; obligations arising out of damage caused by a product, work, service; culpa in contrahendo; negotiorum gestio. The article substantiates that NCO arise, first of all, between persons who are not in a contractual relationship, or between persons who are bound by a contract, but the damage is not caused in connection with a violation of contractual obligations. The article reveals the main provisions of conflict regulation of NCO. The issue of refusal to use the general collision binding of the place of harm (lex loci delicti commissi) is being studied. Nowadays, instead of that collision binding, which was originally used for each type of non-contractual obligation, several alternative collision bindings are used. In addition to the law of the place where the tort was committed, the article also reveals the features of using such collision bindings as the citizenship of the parties or the place of residence of the parties of the legal relationship, the place of release of the goods, the place of registration of the vehicle, etc. The article highlights some aspects of the recent reform of civil legislation and PIL, in particular. The root cause of the reform and renewal of domestic legislation in various areas, which is caused by the European integration processes taking place in Ukraine in recent years, is revealed. The article substantiates the active recodification of civil legislation introduced by the Government of Ukraine, aimed at eliminating certain shortcomings and contradictions in national civil legislation and harmonizing it with the legislation of the European Union. The article places special emphasis on the need to update national legislation and bring it into line with European standards for democratization and liberalization of all spheres of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this article is to analyse extraterritoriality from public international law and private international law perspectives. Although many scholars relate the exercise of extraterritorial jurisdiction to both private and public international law, in practice the topic is mainly considered as belonging to the latter. Moreover, extraterritorial jurisdiction is not a common notion under private international law. Perhaps because the extraterritorial norm is intended to regulate first and foremost state conduct and not relationships between private persons, but this vision does not take into account that the latter are frequently affected by the norm. It is argued here that from a public international law perspective, the legal framework of extraterritorial jurisdiction is unsettled and incomplete. The bottom line is that states are largely free to unfold their power, given that international law does not really regulate extraterritorial jurisdiction but only establishes the negative obligation not to trespass on state sovereignty. Thus, considering extraterritorial jurisdiction from a national perspective, in this paper, under the general framework of private international law is not only necessary but also justified. In addressing the above, this article will first analyse extraterritoriality as an exception under public international law (2). It will reflect on the lawful/unlawful grounds for the exercise of extraterritorial jurisdiction and will show that the abandonment of territoriality in jurisdictional assertions is more desirable than feasible. Then extraterritoriality will be analysed as an inherent feature of private international law, that can be traced in all three domains regulated by the private international law (3). It will also make a case on the extraterritorial reach of national constitutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Actual Problems of Jurisprudence / Habaršy. Zan̦ Seriâsy is the property of Al-Farabi Kazakh National University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Canadian courts treat foreign law as fact. When foreign law governs a dispute as a result of choice-of-law rules, the parties must plead and prove its contents, typically through expert testimony. The trial court assesses the evidence and applies the law, as it was proven, to the case at hand. But what happens when a litigant disagrees with the trial court's view of foreign law and appeals its decision? Appellate courts do not interfere with findings of fact unless the trial judge made a palpable and overriding error. Conversely, appellate courts are free to impose their views on questions of law. Should appellate courts defer to the trial judge or get the final word on issues of foreign law? This article addresses the disagreement between appellate courts over this issue, which the Supreme Court of Canada dodged in a recent case. It delves into the complex features of foreign law, insisting on the distinction between its evidentiary treatment (as fact) and its nature and function in litigation (as law). It makes the case for a nuanced approach to the standard of review which accounts for the many ways in which problems of foreign law present themselves to the courts. As a result, appellate courts should characterize specific questions of foreign law as questions of fact or questions of law rather than attempting to pigeon-hole foreign law itself, an abstraction capable of being both. Ultimately, correctness and deference should coexist in the appellate review of foreign law findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Tabayyun is the property of Arab Center for Research & Policy Studies and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The presented article examines the Hague Conference on Private International Law and the instruments adopted under its auspices, with a particular emphasis on their application within the European Union context. Within the scope of the European Union's competence in judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters, several regulations have been adopted at the Union level, forming a comprehensive framework of Union private international law and procedural law. The Union itself and its Member States are members of the Hague Conference. In situations where both an EU regulation and a Hague convention apply concurrently, it is essential to thoroughly understand the effects of these provisions, their interrelationship, and the resolution of the resulting normative pluralism. The aim of this article is to examine the effects of the Hague conventions within EU law and to analyse how the interrelationships between these legal sources are managed for the practical application of rules in the resolution of disputes involving a foreign element. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]