The third issue of French Journal du droit international (Clunet) for 2011 was just released.
It includes three articles, two of which might be of interest for readers of this blog.
In the first one, Sabine Corneloup, who is a professor of law at the university of Burgundy, explores how an EU law of nationality is currently developing (Réflexion sur l’émergence d’un droit de l’Union européenne en matière de nationalité). The English abstract reads:
The nationality of a Member State is to be determined exclusively on the basis of the national law of that Member State, but each Member State must exercise this competence with due regard to EU law. The ECJ ensures in particular that the legal effects of the possession of the nationality of a Member State are recognized without any restriction. This control affects mainly the national treatment of multiple nationalities. However, the control of the ECJ goes even further and defines also the conditions of loss of the nationality of a Member State. An inventory of the European case law is drawn up. It shows that the ECJ exceeds the Union’s competence determined by the treaties. A European framework for the nationality laws of the Member States requires the adoption of specific legal instruments. Some proposals are specially made to resolve positive conflicts of nationalities which may arise in the application of EU law.
In the second one, Giulio Cesare Giorgini, who lectures at Nice University (that is, the university of the city of Nice), wonders whether the plurality of methods of private international law should be abandoned in international business law (Les limites des méthodes en droit international des affaires . – Pour dépasser une simple lecture économique). The English abstract reads:
International business law is a law of pluralism : pluralism of sources, pluralism of actors, pluralisms of goals, pluralism of methods. However, determining and articulating the domain of these methods is difficult. National legal systems have sometimes rules in order to address this issue but their logic – a logic of authority – seems less satisfactory in this specific field. The article examines the possible solutions in order to suggest that usual approaches must be abandoned. Thus measuring the rational coherence of the concurrent norms may reconcile international business law legal pluralism and the uniformity of its purpose.