Conflict of Laws
  • About
  • Editorial board
  • Subscription
  • Submission
  • Materials
  • Contact
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu

German Annotation on first ECJ Judgment on Brussels II bis

May 21, 2008/in /by Veronika Gaertner
image_pdfimage_print

In November 2007, the ECJ delivered its first judgment on the Brussels II bis Regulation (C-435/06, Applicant C).

Anatol Dutta (Hamburg) has now commented on this judgment in the German legal journal “Zeitschrift für das gesamte Familienrecht” (FamRZ): “Staatliches Wächteramt und europäisches Kindschaftsverfahrensrecht. Die Anwendbarkeit der Brüssel-IIa-Verordnung auf staatliche Maßnahmen zum Schutz des Kindes”, FamRZ 2008, 835 et seq.

See with regard to the reviewed case also our previous posts on the judgment and AG Kokott’s opinion.

Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on X
  • Share on WhatsApp
  • Share on Pinterest
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Share on Vk
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Veronika Gaertner https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Veronika Gaertner2008-05-21 19:45:452008-05-21 19:45:45German Annotation on first ECJ Judgment on Brussels II bis

Categories

  • Views
  • News

Most Recent Posts

  • Support in cross-border transactions by Adults: Contract law vs capacity law August 12, 2026
  • Recognition of Italian Extrajudicial Divorces in Tunisia — Between Methodological Uncertainty and the Need to Preserve Continuity of Personal Status Across Borders August 9, 2026
  • Private International Law and European Society August 4, 2026
  • The New Zealand Supreme Court’s judgment in Kea Investments Ltd v Wikeley on anti-enforcement relief August 3, 2026
  • Beyond Domicile: The BHP Litigation and the Functional Interconnection of Public and Private International Law August 3, 2026
  • Conflicts of jurisdiction in Senegal: lesson from the Senegalese Supreme Court on Lis Pendens and the Exequatur of foreign judgments July 27, 2026
  • Adoption in the proposal for a European Parenthood Regulation July 21, 2026
  • Copyright, Targeting and Geo-Blocking: The CJEU Stirs the Pot July 15, 2026
  • A Follow-Up: The German Judges Association’s Response to the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions July 15, 2026
  • Private International Law Dimensions of Singapore’s New Legislation to Combat Online Harms July 14, 2026
  • The 1961 HCCH Apostille Convention: Why All African Countries Should Ratify It? — Insights from Judicial Practice in Africa July 14, 2026
  • The enforcement of an advance on costs for substitute performance at the expense of a Russian debtor in German-French legal relations July 2, 2026
  • “Yes, in principle, but not quite there yet…” – Some Observations on the Public Consultation on the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions June 29, 2026
  • Judgment Mobility Rules in India’s Private International Law Regime: No place for a revision au fond? June 26, 2026
  • Nothing to See Here: The CJEU’s Decision in Case C-232/25 Idzinski June 18, 2026
Link to: Personal Property Securities in Australia Link to: Personal Property Securities in Australia Personal Property Securities in Australia Link to: ECJ: Judgment in Case “Laboratoires Glaxosmithkline” Link to: ECJ: Judgment in Case “Laboratoires Glaxosmithkline” ECJ: Judgment in Case “Laboratoires Glaxosmithkline”
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top