Publication on Oregon’s New Choice-of-Law Codification for Torts

image_pdfimage_print

Professor Symeon Symeonides, principal draftsman of Oregon’s new choice-of-law codification for torts and other non-contractual claims, which went into effect on January 1, 2010, published an article on these rules. This is the first codification of this interesting but difficult subject in a common-law state of the United States, and the second one after the 1991 codification of the civil-law state of Louisiana. The article is entitled Choice-of-Law. Codification for Torts Conflicts: An Exegesis (Oregon Law Review 2010) and can be downloaded on SSRN.

Issue 2010/1 Nederlands Internationaal Privaatrecht

image_pdfimage_print

The first issue of 2010 of the Dutch PIL journal Nederlands Internationaal Privaatrecht includes the following contributions:

Xandra Kramer – Editorial (Lissabon, Stockholm, Boek 10 BW en andere IPR-beloften voor 2010), p. 1-2

J-G Knot – Europees internationaal erfrecht op komst: het voorstel voor een Europese Erfrechtverordening nader belicht (on the Proposal for a European Regulation on Succession and Wills), p. 3-13; here is the English abstract:

On 14 October 2009 the European Commission published a proposal for a regulation on succession. This new instrument will harmonise all private international law rules regarding succession, viz. jurisdiction, applicable law and recognition and enforcement, on a European Union level. Furthermore, the Regulation creates a European Certificate of Succession. The rules of this Regulation will, after its entry into force, replace the current Dutch private international rules on succession. The Regulation grants general jurisdiction to the courts (a term which entails judicial as well as non-judicial authorities, such as notaries) of the Member State in which the deceased had his or her last habitual residence. Under certain circumstances it is possible to refer to courts of a Member State whose law has been chosen and who are better placed to hear the case. Courts may also have jurisdiction based on the fact that property of the deceased is located in that Member State, if the last habitual residence of the deceased was not in a Member State. The law applicable to the whole of the succession is that of the Member State of the last habitual residence of the deceased. A testator can also expressly choose the application of the law of his or her nationality to the succession of the estate. In this article the rules of the proposal are examined extensively. Differences between the proposal and the existing Dutch rules on private international law of succession are commented upon. One of the biggest changes will be that the different approach with regard to the devolution and the administration of estates in private international law, as currently employed in the Netherlands, will disappear under the European Regulation. The conclusion reads that, notwithstanding the fact that the proposal still needs several improvements, the introduction of a European Succession Regulation will in my opinion contribute to an easier and more effective administration of cross-border successions within Europe.

S.F.G. Rammeloo – Op de valreep… Eenvormige interpretatie door Hof van Justitie EG van artikel 4 EVO (case note on ICF/MIC, ECJ C-133/08), p. 20-26); here is the English abstract:

On 6 October 2009, the ECJ gave an interpretative ruling in case C-133/08 on Article 4 of the EC Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations (Rome, 1980). The questions in the preliminary proceedings relate to the applicable law to a charter-party contract cum annexis in the absence of choice by the parties (‘objective proper law test’), the seperability of the contract, and the connecting criteria of Article 4, subsection 4 in conjunction with subsections 1, 2 and 5. The main proceedings and the essential observations of the ECJ judgment are followed by a critical analysis as
well as some considerations on its potential effects on the interpretation of Article 4 (objective proper law test) and Article 5 (contract on the carriage of goods) of EC Regulation 593/2008 which on 27 December 2009 replaced the 1980 Convention.

L.R. Kiestra – De betekenis van het EVRM voor de internationale gerechtelijke vaststelling van het vaderschap (case note on three Dutch judgments concerning  8 ECHR and the judicial establishment of paternity), p. 27-30; here is the English abstract:

This case note discusses three Dutch cases concerning the meaning of Article 8 ECHR for the judicial establishment of paternity (‘gerechtelijke vaststelling van het vaderschap’). All three cases concerned a mother who wanted to establish the paternity of a man over her child(ren). In all three cases a foreign law was applicable to the situation, according to the relevant Dutch choice of law rules (‘Wet conflictenrecht afstamming’). Under the applicable foreign laws in the three cases, it was not possible to judicially establish paternity over the child(ren). The Dutch judge had to decide whether this would result in a violation of the ECHR and consequently whether the applicable law had to be set aside on the basis of
the public policy exception. In two of the three cases, the judge came to the conclusion that the normally applicable foreign law had to be set aside, while in one of the cases the judge decided that this was not
necessary. This case note discusses the different outcomes in these three cases and examines a number of issues related to the possible impact of the ECHR on private international law. These include whether or not the ECHR can in fact be at all applicable to such private international law matters and the relationship between the public policy exception and the ECHR.

Richard Fentiman – Book presentation: ‘International Commercial Litigation’, Oxford University Press 2010, p. 31-32.

Trevor Hartley – Book presentation: ‘International Commercial Litigation: Text, Cases and Materials on Private International Law’, Cambridge University Press 2009, p. 32-33.

Program on International Commercial Contracts in Ravenna

image_pdfimage_print

The Faculty of Law of the University of Bologna and the Center for International Legal Education (CILE) of the University of Pittsburgh School of Law have announced their Summer School program in International Commercial Contracts, which will take place on June 7-11, 2010 at the Ravenna campus of the University of Bologna. The Summer School aims at providing participants with an in-depth understanding of drafting, managing and litigating international contracts under different sources of law, with a focus on selected contracts that are of particular relevance in international practice. Instructors will include academics from the University of Bologna, the University of Pittsburgh, New York University, as well as academics from other top-level European and US institutions and professionals specifically involved in international contract practice. The brochure with all relevant information on applications, fees, schedules and CLE credits, is available here.

ERA Conference International Commercial Transactions

image_pdfimage_print

This ERA Conference on International Commercial Transactions takes place on 10-11 June 2010. The objective is to analyse the legal aspects of international commercial transactions with a special focus on cross-border sale of goods.

Key topics include:

– UN Sales Convention (CISG). The CISG represents a landmark in the process of international unification of law. For example, if a company from Germany enters into a sales contract with a business that comes from the US, France or any other of the more than 70 Contracting States, the CISG will apply (unless the parties expressly agree otherwise). It is estimated that 75% of all international sales transactions worldwide are potentially governed by the CISG. There will be particular emphasis on: drafting international commercial contracts;  cross-border sales; application and ambit of the CISG;  remedies for breach of contract.

– UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts (PICC). The UNIDROIT Principles on international commercial contracts are considered the most important set of rules which parties to an international contract can choose to govern their agreement. Moreover, they are becoming increasingly indispensable in international arbitration. There will be particular emphasis on:  use of the PICC in international arbitration; damages; assignment of rights / contracts; coexistence of CISG, PICC and CFR.

Target group is primarily: practitioners of law dealing with transnational commercial law.

Click here for further information

Reminder: Conference on Party Autonomy in Property Law

image_pdfimage_print

On 27 and 28 May 2010 a conference on Party Autonomy in Property Law, organized by Erasmus School of Law and Leiden University (the Netherlands), will be held at the Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Leading specialists will present their views on diverse aspects of international property law.

For more information and registration, please click here. See also our previous post.

Preliminary question Dutch Court on Art. 45 Brussels Regulation

image_pdfimage_print
In a case concerning the enforcement of a Belgian judgment in the Netherlands, between Prism Investments BV v. J.A. van der Meer qq Arilco Holland BV, the Dutch Supreme Court (HR 12 March 2010, LJN BK4932, 08/04424) referred the following question regarding Art. 45 of the Brussels Regulation to the ECJ (Case C-139/10)
Does Article 45 of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 1 preclude the court with which an appeal is lodged under Article 43 or Article 44 of that regulation from refusing or revoking the declaration of enforceability on a ground, other than one of those specified in Articles 34 and 35 of that regulation, which has been advanced against enforcement of the judgment declared enforceable and which arose after that judgment had been delivered, such as the ground that there has been compliance with that judgment?

Abusive Forum Shopping?

image_pdfimage_print

On April 28th, 2010, the Paris Court of Appeal dismissed the claim of Vivendi that its shareholders had abused their right to sue by initiating a class action against the company in New York, and thus dismissed the appeal lodged by Vivendi against the first instance judgment.

The argument of Vivendi was that its shareholders had abused their “right to forum shopping” by failling to bring their action before the “natural forum” (juge naturel) of the parties, i.e. a French court, and by bringing it instead before a foreign court. To give credit to its case theory, Vivendi, a French company, had only sued a couple of French shareholders in France. The remedy sought was an anti-suit injunction.

I have already summarized the facts of this case in a previous post. Suffice to say that a class action had been initiated in New York by shareholders, many of whom were French, but also many of whom were not. Shares had been traded in France, but also in the US. The directors of Vivendi were accused of having made financial misrepresentations in the US while living there. Vivendi was accused, and eventually found guilty, of numerous violation of US securities law.

Abuse of Law

So, were French courts the natural forum for this case? The Paris Court of appeal did not think so.

Read more