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

Another Comment on Aguirre Pelz

January 8, 2012/in /by Marta Requejo
image_pdfimage_print

Dr. Mónica Herranz, full time Professor of Private International Law at the National Distance Education University in Madrid (Spain), has just published a paper on the ECJ ruling Aguirre Pelz (C- 491/10 PPUU), under the title “El control por el juez de origen de las decisiones dictadas en aplicación del artículo 42 del R. 2201/2003: el asunto Aguirre Pelz”, Revista General de Derecho Europeo, (25) 2011.

The author analyzes critically the reasoning of the parties in the proceedings, as well as the approach taken by the General Advocate and the solution adopted by the ECJ. Other relevant ECJ rulings in kidnapping cases are discussed. The paper also includes an explanation of the different legal channels for appealing a decision when a fundamental right has been violated (in the State of origin, in the destination State and before the ECHR).

The study shows the need to review the legal solution for intra-community kidnapping cases.

Mónica Herranz: mherranz@der.uned.es

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 Requejo2012-01-08 09:50:262012-01-08 18:58:48Another Comment on Aguirre Pelz

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: Cross-Border Civil Litigation in Peru: a New Draft Link to: Cross-Border Civil Litigation in Peru: a New Draft Cross-Border Civil Litigation in Peru: a New Draft Link to: Sciences Po PILAGG Workshop Series, January-February 2012 Link to: Sciences Po PILAGG Workshop Series, January-February 2012 Sciences Po PILAGG Workshop Series, January-February 2012
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top