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

A.G. Saugmandsgaard on the recognition of private (Sharia) divorces under Rome III

September 16, 2017/in News/by Giesela Ruehl
image_pdfimage_print

It does not happen too often that (the notion of) European Private International Law hits the front pages of the daily news. But on Friday it did: Germany’s foremost (conservative) newspaper, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ), addressed A.G. Saugmandsgaard’s recent opinion on the recognition of private (Sharia) divorces under the Rome III Regulation. In so doing the FAZ expressly pointed out, on page 1, that it was unclear whether “European rules on choice of law (“Europäisches Kollisionsrecht”) actually applied in the case at bar.

The A.G.’s full opinion according to which the Rome III Regulation (if it applies at all) does not allow a private divorce to be recognized as valid where the applicable foreign law is discriminatory, is available here (in a number of languages, but not yet in English). The official press release can be downloaded here.

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 Ruehl2017-09-16 05:38:182018-08-11 14:02:22A.G. Saugmandsgaard on the recognition of private (Sharia) divorces under Rome III

Categories

  • Views
  • News

Most Recent Posts

  • CJEU in Marwanak C 873/24 on the interpretation of the Succession Regulation in light of its objectives November 11, 2026
  • Enforcing China’s Statutory Post-Judgment Interest in Other Jurisdictions November 11, 2026
  • Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments between Greece and Albania November 6, 2026
  • Brazil’s Superior Court Invokes Forum Non Conveniens: Is that Really What They Mean? November 4, 2026
  • Recognition of a Kosovar Judgment in Greece October 28, 2026
  • The Philippines: Recognition of Foreign Divorces and Recent Amendments to the Rules of Court October 21, 2026
  • Mozambican Supreme Court Recognises an Indian Adoption: A Teleological Approach to the Recognition of Foreign Acts October 19, 2026
  • Egyptian Supreme Court Enforces Italian Judgment: The Right Outcome despite Some Reservations October 14, 2026
  • Talaq Divorce Cases in the United States October 7, 2026
  • Book Review: Choice of Forum Clauses in Asia (Lemuel L Lopez) October 5, 2026
  • Zamzam on Egyptian Private International Law (in Arabic): Towards Reviving the Golden Age of Egyptian Private International Law October 2, 2026
  • Maintenance Duties for a Gestational Surrogate Following Non-Recognition – An Unreported Spanish Judgment September 22, 2026
  • From Symbolism to Substance: Comity and Judicial Reform in South Africa’s Foreign Judgments Regime September 15, 2026
  • Persistent and Reasonable Efforts in the Field of Cross-Border Service of Documents. Continuation or Stay of Proceedings? September 12, 2026
  • Speaking for the Dead: Idziski and the Forum for Post-Mortem Likeness Claims September 7, 2026
Link to: Van Den Eeckhout on Private International Law and Globalisation Link to: Van Den Eeckhout on Private International Law and Globalisation Van Den Eeckhout on Private International Law and Globalisation Link to: HCCH Draft Guide to Good Practice on Article 13(1)(b) of the Hague Child Abduction Convention Link to: HCCH Draft Guide to Good Practice on Article 13(1)(b) of the Hague Child Abduction Convention HCCH Draft Guide to Good Practice on Article 13(1)(b) of the Hague Child Abduction...
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top