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

New Title on Nagoya University Comparative Study of Civil Justice

December 6, 2009/in /by Marta Requejo
image_pdfimage_print

CCF20091007_00000Professor Masanori Kawano, from Nagoya University, leads the project “Establishing a new framework for realizing effective transnational business litigation”, supported by the Grant-in-Aid Program for Creative Scientific Research of JSPS. Main aim of this project is the setting up of an international framework and a methodology for comparative legal studies, in order to alleviate the problems stemming from legal diversity. To meet this goal, Professor Kawano has planned a series of books on civil justice in European countries.

“Civil Justice in Spain”, edited by Professors Carlos Esplugues and Silvia Barona, from University of Valencia, is the third book of this series, being preceded by its equivalent in the United Kingdom, edited by Professor Neil Andrews, and in Finland, edited by Professor Laura Ervo. Upcoming books will include Italy, France and Hungary. “Civil Justice in Spain” has been published by Jigakusha Editions (Tokio) and it offers a thorough overview on Spanish civil procedure. Authors come from different Universities in Spain and have worked according to the aforementioned methodology, in order to facilitate access to Spanish system to English-speaking readers and professionals, especially from Asia.

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 Marta Requejo https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Marta Requejo2009-12-06 12:19:562009-12-06 12:19:56New Title on Nagoya University Comparative Study of Civil Justice

Categories

  • Views
  • News

Most Recent Posts

  • 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
  • Refusal to Enforce in Egypt of a Californian (U.S.) Judgment for Lack of Reciprocity: What Has Gotten into the Egyptian Supreme Court? June 15, 2026
  • PRC Double Interest neither Double nor Penal: Australian Courts Clear Its Name When Enforcing Chinese Judgments June 10, 2026
  • The AIFC Court, Gazprom v Naftogaz and the Emergence of a New Conduit Jurisdiction Debate June 6, 2026
Link to: Non-Domiciled Parties and the Brussels I Regulation: A Phantom Menace Link to: Non-Domiciled Parties and the Brussels I Regulation: A Phantom Menace Non-Domiciled Parties and the Brussels I Regulation: A Phantom Menace Link to: Martinez will have to wait Link to: Martinez will have to wait Martinez will have to wait
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top