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

Do we need a Rome 0-Regulation?

July 22, 2013/in /by Giesela Ruehl
image_pdfimage_print

As reported earlier in our blog, Stefan Leible and Hannes Unberath from the University of Bayreuth hosted a conference on the question whether we need a Rome 0-Regulation in June 2012. Recently, the conference volume has been published. For the moment it is available in German only. However, the editors are contemplating an English version at a later stage.

The volume contains the following contributions:

  • Felix M. Wilke, Einführung, pp. 23 et seq.
  • Erik Jayme, Kodifikation und Allgemeiner Teil im IPR, pp. 33 et seq.
  • Rolf Wagner, Das rechtspolitische Umfeld für eine Rom 0-Verordnung, pp. 51 et seq.
  • Michael Grünberger, Alles obsolet? – Anerkennungsprinzip vs. klassisches IPR, pp. 81 et seq.
  • Giesela Rühl, Allgemeiner Teil und Effizienz. Zur Bedeutung des ökonomischen Effizienzkriteriums im europäischen Kollisionsrecht, pp. 161 et seq.
  • Helmut Heiss/Emese Kaufmann-Mohi, ”Qualifikation“ Ein Regelungsgegenstand für eine Rom 0- Verordnung?, pp. 181 et seq.
  • Gerald Mäsch, Zur Vorfrage im europäischen IPR, pp. 201 et seq.
  • Oliver Remien, Engste Verbindung und Ausweichklauseln, pp. 223 et seq.
  • Heinz-Peter Mansel, Parteiautonomie, Rechtsgeschäftslehre der Rechtswahl und Allgemeinen Teil des europäischen Kollisionsrechts, pp. 241 et seq.
  • Marc-Philippe Weller, Der ”gewöhnliche Aufenthalt“ – Plädoyer für einen willenszentrierten Aufenthaltsbegriff, pp. 293 et seq.
  • Martin Gebauer, Stellvertretung, pp. 325 et seq.
  • Jan von Hein, Der Renvoi im europäischen Kollisionsrecht, pp. 341 et seq.
  • Florian Eichel, Interlokale und interpersonale Anknüpfungen, pp. 397 et seq.
  • Hans Jürgen Sonnenberger, Eingriffsnormen, pp. 429 et seq.
  • Wolfgang Wurmnest, Ordre public, pp. 445 et seq.
  • Eva-Maria Kieninger, Ermittlung und Anwendung ausländischen Rechts, pp. 479 et seq.
  • Stefan Leible, Hannes Unberath, p. 503

More information is available on the publisher’s website (in German).

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 Giesela Ruehl https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Giesela Ruehl2013-07-22 09:15:442013-07-22 09:15:44Do we need a Rome 0-Regulation?

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: PhD Positions in Private International Law in Luxembourg Link to: PhD Positions in Private International Law in Luxembourg PhD Positions in Private International Law in Luxembourg Link to: The 3rd Petar Sarcevic conference on family law Link to: The 3rd Petar Sarcevic conference on family law The 3rd Petar Sarcevic conference on family law
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top