As part of the second online symposium on recent developments in African private international law, we are pleased to present the third contribution, prepared by Béligh Elbalti(The University of Osaka, Japan), on Foreign Judgments in Mozambique through the Lens of the Enforcement of a Chinese Judgment: Liberal Practice in the Shadow of Statutory Rigidity.
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Béligh Elbaltihttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngBéligh Elbalti2026-02-04 08:33:592026-06-03 12:24:52Online Symposium on Recent Developments in African PIL (III) – Foreign Judgments in Mozambique through the Lens of the Enforcement of a Chinese Judgment: Liberal Practice in the Shadow of Statutory Rigidity
The 1958 New York Convention (‘NYC’) is widely regarded as international arbitration’s most significant achievement. Having been ratified by over 160 states, , establishing a credible system of enforcement for arbitral awards. Yet the commercial reservation under Article 1(3), which allows the reserving state to limit the application of the ‘Convention only to differences …. considered as commercial’ under its own national law, risks jeopardizing the uniformity of the convention. By domesticating the definition of commerciality, the reservation invites forum shopping and inconsistent enforcement. Read more
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2026/02/COLOURBOX64672371.jpg54648192Tobias Lutzihttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngTobias Lutzi2026-02-03 13:34:482026-02-04 10:44:53From Deference to Objectivity: How Courts Are Rewriting the Commercial Reservation
As part of the second online symposium on recent developments in African private international law, we are pleased to present the second contribution, kindly prepared by Boris Awa(Kigali Independent University, Rwanda), on The Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments within the CEMAC Zone.
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Béligh Elbaltihttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngBéligh Elbalti2026-02-03 08:52:122026-02-03 09:41:57Online Symposium on Recent Developments in African PIL (II) – The Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments within the CEMAC Zone
Posted on behalf of Erdem Küçüker, an attorney-at-law registered at the Istanbul Bar Association and a private law LL.M student at Koç University. Mr. Küçüker specializes in commercial arbitration, arbitration-related litigation and commercial litigation, and acts as secretary to arbitral tribunals.
Article V of the 1958 New York Convention (“NYC”) lists the grounds of non-enforcement of a foreign arbitral award. Accordingly, Article V(1)(e) provides that when “[t]he award has not yet become binding on the parties, or has been set aside or suspended by a competent authority of the country in which, or under the law of which, that award was made” the award’s enforcement may be refused.
In 2024, the Turkish Court of Cassation quashed the lower courts’ decision that declared an International Centre for Dispute Resolution of the American Arbitration Association (“ICDR”) award as enforceable, stating that the courts should have further investigated whether the award is final, enforceable and binding (Court of Cassation, 11th Civil Chamber, Docket No: E. 2022/5986, Decision No: K. 2024/2257, Date: 20.03.2024). This article explains the decision of the Turkish Court of Cassation and comments on the final, enforceable and binding character of an arbitral award in relation to Article V(1)(e) of the NYC. Read more
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Zeynep Derya Tarmanhttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngZeynep Derya Tarman2026-02-02 19:57:432026-04-08 15:10:57Article V(1)(e) of the 1958 New York Convention in Light of a Decision of the Turkish Court of Cassation
As previously announced, we are launching the second online symposium on recent developments in African private international law. As part of this symposium, a series of blog posts addressing various aspects of recent developments in African private international law will be published on this platform over the coming days.
We open the series with a blog post by Abubakri Yekini (Senior Lecturer in Law at the University of Manchester) and Chukwuma Samuel Adesina Okoli (Assistant Professor in Commercial Conflict of Laws at the University of Birmingham and Senior Research Associate at the Centre for Private International Law in Emerging Countries at the University of Johannesburg), focusing on the recognition and enforcement of international judgments in Nigeria.
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Béligh Elbaltihttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngBéligh Elbalti2026-02-02 09:38:532026-02-03 09:42:42Online Symposium on Recent Developments in African PIL (I) – Recognition and Enforcement of International Judgments in Nigeria
It is not uncommon for African and foreign scholars of private international law (PIL) to lament the current state of the field in Africa. Until the early years of the 21st century, PIL was widely regarded, often with little hesitation, as ‘a neglected and highly underdeveloped subject in Africa’.[i] Professor Forsyth famously described it as a ‘Cinderella subject, seldom studied and little understood’.[ii] This limited scholarly attention is reflected, for instance, in the treatment of African PIL in the Hague Academy courses, which include only 4 courses specifically devoted to PIL in Africa, the most recent of which dates back to 1993.[iii] Since then, a number of pleas for greater attention to PIL in Africa,[iv] as well as calls for enhanced cooperation with African countries to ensure better involvement and inclusiveness,[v] have been voiced.[vi]Read more
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Béligh Elbaltihttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngBéligh Elbalti2026-02-01 06:27:252026-06-18 00:58:28Online Symposium on Recent Developments in African Private International Law
Posted on behalf of Jason Mitchell, barrister at Maitland Chambers in London and at Group 621 in Johannesburg.
An Australian, Hannon, wants to book a Southern African safari with his partner, Murti, as a surprise birthday gift. He sees one he likes on an Australian travel website. Hannon fills in the online form.
It turns out that the website is just the agent for a South African company, Drifters Adventours. Drifters emailed Hannon the price and payment details. Attached to the email is a brochure. The brochure says, “Drifters do not accept responsibility for any loss, injury, damage, accident, fatality, delay or inconvenience experienced while on tour.” The brochure also says, “You will be required to complete and sign a full indemnity prior to your tour departure.” Read more
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Saloni Khanderiahttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngSaloni Khanderia2026-02-01 05:51:522026-02-01 15:49:27Conflict of laws in the South African courts: an(other) recent missed opportunity
By Luisa Cassar Pullicino and Krista Refalo, Ganado Advocates
In the preliminary reference Case C-77/24 Wunner (the Titanium Brace case), the CJEU was asked to determine whether a damages claim brought by a consumer directly against company directors for losses suffered from unlicensed online gambling fell within the scope of the Rome II Regulation (Regulation (EC) No 864/2007), or whether it was excluded under Article 1(2)(d) as a “non-contractual obligation arising out of the law of companies”.
The practical stakes were considerable. If Rome II applied, Article 4(1) would designate the law of the place where the damage occurred — which, for online gambling losses, would normally be the habitual residence of the consumer. If excluded, the applicable law would instead be determined by national conflict-of-laws rules, typically, the lex societatis.
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2025/10/eu-court-of-justice-213379_1920.jpg12751920Tobias Lutzihttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngTobias Lutzi2026-01-16 22:43:572026-01-16 22:45:05The Titanium Brace Tightens: Rome II and Director Liability after Wunner
One of the requirements for issue estoppel is identity of issue. However, the process of ‘refining down’ or ‘salami-slicing’[1] is not always clear. The argument that the issue is different because the two courts would arrive at different conclusions on the governing law is increasingly being utilised as a litigation strategy. If the first court applied its choice of law rules to determine that the governing law of the claim is Utopian law, would an issue estoppel arise over this decision in the second court if under the second court’s choice of law rules, Ruritanian law is the governing law? The answer depends on whether the ‘slice’ is thick or thin. Is the relevant issue ‘What law governs the dispute or issue?’ or ‘What law is identified by our (forum) choice of law rules to govern the dispute or issue?’ Read more
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Adeline Chonghttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngAdeline Chong2026-01-16 06:43:092026-01-16 11:17:26‘Salami-slicing’ and Issue Estoppel: Foreign Decisions on the Governing Law
On 1 January 2026, the Legislative Decree No. 25/2025 promulgating a new Civil Transactions Act (hereafter ‘NCTA’) entered into force. The NCTA repeals and replaces the former Federal Civil Transactions Act of 1985 (hereafter ‘the 1985 Act’). The adoption of the NCTA forms part of the State’s broader and ongoing effort to comprehensively update and modernize its legal system, an effort that has already touched major legislative instruments, including, among many others, the 2022 Civil Procedure Act, the 2024 Personal Status Act, the 2023 Competition Act, and the 2022 Commercial Transactions Act.
Since the 1985 Act contained a codified set of conflict-of-laws rules, its replacement necessarily entails a re-examination of the UAE’s private international law framework and, at least in principle, the introduction of new or revised choice-of-law provisions. Against this background, this note offers a preliminary and necessarily tentative assessment of the modifications introduced by the NCTA. It focuses on the main features of the new law in relation to choice-of-law regulation, highlighting both the changes introduced and the limits of the reform. Read more
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Béligh Elbaltihttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngBéligh Elbalti2026-01-12 05:05:182026-01-12 07:42:12The Conflict-of-Law Rules in the UAE’s New Civil Transactions Act: Yet Another Missed Opportunity!
