image_pdfimage_print

Views

The AIFC Court, Gazprom v Naftogaz and the Emergence of a New Conduit Jurisdiction Debate

This post is written by Dr. Nicolás Zambrana-Tévar LLM(LSE) PhD(Navarra), Associate Professor School of Law KIMEP

Introduction

In May 2026, the Court of First Instance of the Astana International Financial Centre (AIFC) recognised and enforced a Swiss ICC arbitral award rendered in favour of Naftogaz against Gazprom. The award arose out of the disputes between the parties concerning the transit of Russian gas through Ukraine after the start of the war.

Read more

Montana Supreme Court Decides International Child Custody Case

The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, which has been enacted by every U.S. state, discourages forum shopping in child custody disputes by assigning subject-matter jurisdiction to the court located in the “home state” of the child. In Allen v. Allen, decided on April 21, 2026, the Montana Supreme Court had to determine whether the child’s “home state” was Montana or the Netherlands. This case shines an important spotlight on the importance of timing in international child custody disputes. The left-behind parent’s likelihood of success is strongly correlated with how quickly her or she acts to vindicate their legal rights. Read more

China’s Countering Improper Foreign Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Regulation Blocked EU’s Extraterritorial Data Acquisition

Written by Jeremy MEI Ziyang

LLM student at Wuhan University

Visiting student at Singapore Management University

I. Background

On 15 May this year, Ministry of Justice (MOJ) of China issued its Official Notice No 5 of 2026 (‘the MOJ Notice’), announcing that the relevant extraterritorial investigation carried out by EU on Chinese entities Nuctech constitutes improper extraterritorial jurisdiction measures under China’s Regulation on Countering Improper Foreign Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ROCIFEJ, State Council Decree No 835).[1] This Regulation was promulgated and entered into force on 7 April 2026. As a nationwide regulation promulgated by State Council, although it cannot be called an ‘Act’ that should be passed by the National People’s Congress, its legal hierarchical force directly follows an ‘Act’, higher than the previous Blocking Rules issued by Ministry of Commerce (MOC).[2]

Read more

News

Private International Law Festival 24-25 September 2026: Registration Open

Breakdown of the Rules-Based International Order
– What Role for Private International Law?

Following the first Private International Law Festival in 2022 (conference report),  on 24-25 September 2026, the University of Edinburgh Law School and the Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law, generously supported by the Lindemann Foundation, will cohost the second Private International Law Festival at Edinburgh University’s splendid Playfair Library in Edinburgh. Two days of conflict of laws, plus a Ceilidh!

The program is here, a flyer is here. As to the Ceilidh, no prior expertise is expected, but you can take a look here.

Registration is open until August 28, please register here.

ZEuP – Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht 3/2026

A new issue of ZEuP – Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht is now available and includes contributions on EU private law, comparative law and legal history, legal unification, private international law, and individual European private law regimes. The full table of content can be accessed here: https://rsw.beck.de/zeitschriften/zeup. 

Read more

Out Now: Calliess & Renner, Rome Regulations: Commentary (4th Edition)

Kluwer Law International has just released the fourth edition of Rome Regulations: Commentary, edited by Gralf-Peter Calliess and Moritz Renner, offering an article-by-article “German-style” analysis of the Rome I, II, and III Regulations. This landmark work has long been recognized as a leading authority on EU conflict-of-laws rules, and the new edition brings the commentary fully up to date.
The updated volume incorporates developments since 2020, most notably landmark CJEU rulings that have advanced a common European understanding of the Regulations’ key provisions. It also addresses the post-Brexit landscape of EU-UK relations in private international law, and, reflecting a growing practical concern, the increasing intersection of economic sanctions regimes with overriding mandatory provisions.
More information is available at the publisher’s website.