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

About Andrew Dickinson

This author has not written his bio yet.
But we are proud to say that Andrew Dickinson contributed 60 entries already.

Entries by Andrew Dickinson

Brussels I Review – Interface with Arbitration

June 17, 2009/8 Comments/in /by Andrew Dickinson

The Brussels I Regulation’s interface with arbitration vies with

Brussels I Review – Lis Pendens and Related Actions

June 15, 2009/in /by Andrew Dickinson

The fifth topic considered in the Green Paper concerns possible adjustments to the lis pendens rules in Arts. 27 and following of the Brussels I Regulation (excluding aspects specifically related to

Brussels I Review – Provisional Measures

June 12, 2009/in /by Andrew Dickinson

The next topic considered in the Green Paper is the treatment of provisional and protective measures under the Regulation.  In the Commission’s view: The report describes several difficulties with respect to the free circulation of provisional measures. With respect to ex parte measures,  it might be appropriate to clarify that such measures can be recognised […]

Brussels I Review – Intellectual Property

June 11, 2009/in /by Andrew Dickinson

The Commission’s fourth question concerns the Regulations treatment of litigation concerning intellectual (industrial) property rights. In its Green Paper, the Commission comments: The possibility to effectively enforce or challenge industrial property rights in the Community is of fundamental importance for the good functioning of the internal market. Substantive law on intellectual property is already largely […]

Brussels I Review – Choice of Court Agreements

June 11, 2009/3 Comments/in /by Andrew Dickinson

Among the issues raised by the Green Paper, those concerning the treatment of choice of court agreements raises are, almost certainly, the most difficult and controversial.  In considering possible reforms, a balance must be struck between the advantages, both commercial and in terms of promoting legal certainty, of supporting party autonomy in matters of jurisdiction, […]

Brussels I Review – The Wider International Picture

June 9, 2009/in /by Andrew Dickinson

The second topic discussed in the Commission’s Green Paper raises more fundamental questions concerning the treatment under EC law of situations having a material connection with one or more States outside the EC (excluding, for these purposes, the other Contracting States to the Lugano Convention) , including questions of (1) jurisdiction of a Member State […]

Brussels I Review – The Abolition of Exequatur?

June 8, 2009/in /by Andrew Dickinson

This is the first of a series of posts soliciting comment on the proposals for reform of the Brussels I Regulation in the Commission’s recent

Brussels I Review – Online Focus Group

June 8, 2009/1 Comment/in /by Andrew Dickinson

Many will, by now, have had the opportunity to consider the

10th Anniversary of the Yearbook of Private International Law

February 19, 2009/in /by Andrew Dickinson

For the 10th Anniversary of the Yearbook of Private International Law, a conference will be held in Lausanne, Switzerland, on 19 March 2009 at the Swiss Institute of Comparative Law. The topic of the day will be “The Future of PIL between National and International Codifications and Case Law”.  The program can be found

New Release of DeCITA, the leading Latin American Legal Review on Private International Law and International Trade Law

January 7, 2009/in /by Andrew Dickinson

DeCITA (Derecho del Comercio Internacional – Temas y Actualidades) (semi-annual publication in spanish, english, portugese or french) has released its 9th issue. As usual it covers topics concerning not only Latin American Private International Law but also European and North American Law. Each issue is devoted to one specific subject and adresses also the latest […]

Page 6 of 6«‹456

Categories

  • Views
  • News

Most Recent Posts

  • 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
  • Montana Supreme Court Decides International Child Custody Case June 3, 2026
  • China’s Countering Improper Foreign Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Regulation Blocked EU’s Extraterritorial Data Acquisition May 29, 2026
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top