Patrick Kinsch, who is a visiting professor at the University of Luxembourg and a member of the Luxembourg bar, has posted Private International Law Topics before the European Court of Human Rights – Selected Judgments and Decisions (2010-2011) on SSRN.

This is a presentation of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in cases decided in 2010 and 2011 involving questions touching on private international law. The selection includes the following themes: Choice of law rules and the right to non-discrimination. – The right to recognition of a status acquired abroad. – International child abduction and the right to family life.

As a general matter, it is worth recalling that the task of the Court is not to review domestic law in abstracto, but to determine whether the manner in which it was applied to the applicant has infringed the Convention. This means that private international law cases that come before the Court will be dealt with in a refreshingly, or irritatingly – depending on the preferences of the reader –, undogmatic manner: the most subtle rules of private international law, and the most learned judgments of the national courts on the applicant’s case, will be nothing more than facts, the effects of which on the applicant’s human rights are the Court’s sole concern.

The paper was published in the last volume of the Yearbook of Private International Law.

The fourth issue of International and Comparative Law Quarterly for 2012 includes one article exploring a private international law issue and a case commentary of the Edate advertising decision of the European Court of Justice.

The article is authored by Janeen Carruthers (University of Glasgow) and discusses Party Autonomy in the Legal Regulation of Adult Relationships: What Place for Party Choice in Private International Law?

This article is an examination of the merits of permitting the exercise of party autonomy in choice of court and choice of law in respect of the personal and patrimonial aspects of adult relationships. It provides a commentary on the party autonomy provisions of EU harmonization instruments, actual and proposed, in family law. The treatment considers the particular issues of drafting which arise from the specialties of family law, and ponders whether or not the refinements required render the exercise of permitting party autonomy self-defeating.

On September 2nd 2012, Professor Ole Lando celebrated his 90th birthday. This Liber Amicorum was published in order to honor his contributions to the development of International Contract Law and the Conflict of Laws.

• Konkurrenz der Rechtsordnungen und “Law made in Germany” – Christian von Bar
• An EU Law for Cross-Border Sales Only – Its Meaning and Implications in Open Markets – Jürgen Basedow
• The PECL and Consumer Remedies under the CESL – Hugh Beale
• Do Swedish Civil Status Records Qualify to be Recognized in the Other EU Member States? – Michael Bogdan
• The Lasting Influence of the Lando Principles – Eric Clive
• A Plea for European Conflict Rules on Proprietary Security – Ulrich Drobnig
• 40 Years of EU Competition Law – Jens Fejø
• Private International Law Issues by Opt-out and Opt-in Instruments of Harmonization: A Comparison between CISG and CESL – Morten M. Fogt
• Un “rattachement cumulatif”: nationalité étatique et citoyenneté européenne – Hélène Gaudemet-Tallon
• Loan Agreements and Increased Refinancing Costs – Lars Gorton
• A Ius Commune Casebook on the Effects of European Union Law on Legal Relationships between Individuals – Arthur Hartkamp
• The International Scope of Choice-of-Court Agreements under the Brussels I Regulation, the Lugano Convention and the Hague Convention – Trevor C. Hartley
• Ulysses – Over Nordic Default Oceans Back to Contract Commitment Safe Haven – Kai Krüger & Berte-Elen Konow
• CISG and CESL – Ulrich Magnus
• The Recast of the Brussels I Regulation – Peter Arnt Nielsen
• The Ban on Discrimination as a General Principle of Contract Law – Ruth Nielsen
• Ole Lando, Djingis Kahn and Memetics – Christina Ramberg
• Constitutional Review on Trial – Some Reflexions in Honour of Professor Ole Lando – Hjalte Rasmussen
• Zinsen Wegen Zahlungsverzug im Vorschlag eines Gemeinsamen Europäischen Kaufrechts (GEKR/CESL) und die Pluralität von Dessen Quellen – Oliver Remien
• Model Laws for Implementing International Conventions – The Implementation of the 1970 UNESCO Convention on Cultural Property – Kurt Siehr
• Innovation and Law – Ditlev Tamm & Pia Letto-Vanamo
• Can Comparative Law and Economics Fill One of the Gaps Between Legal and Economic Theory? – Christina D. Tvarnø
• Commercial Agents and Special Jurisdiction – Kim Østergaard

More details can be found here.

A call for papers has been issued for the 10th edition of the Young International Lawyers Research Forum, which will be hosted by the University of Catania on 24-25 January 2013. The deadline for submission of abstracts is Saturday 24 November 2012. Here’s a presentation of the event (the full text of the call is available in Italian and English):

The meeting, launched in Italy in 2003, is intended to provide a platform for young international legal scholars to discuss ongoing research papers and materials linked to the topics annually offered. The theme of the coming YIL Research Forum is A Lackland Law? Territory, Effectiveness and Jurisdiction in International and European Law.

The general topic of the current edition will be analysed through three sub-themes, each one exploring different dimensions and developments of rules and principles governing “territoriality” issues at international and supranational levels: 1) Crisis of Territorial Order and International Law; 2) Beyond Territories. International Law, Jurisdictions and New Geographies of Spaces; 3) End or Return of Territories? The New Frontiers of the Territorial Enforcement of Law.

These sub-themes will be discussed during three panel sessions and a final round table. The thematic sessions will host a key-note guest speaker, interventions of paper-givers (selected through a peer-reviewed process) and the conclusive remarks of a guest-discussant.

The Organising Committee invites proposals for papers to be presented at the Research Forum. The Call for Papers is now open and the deadline for submission of abstracts is Saturday 24 November 2012. All younger academics and legal professionals are encouraged to submit abstracts. The selected papers, the key-note lectures and the round table proceedings will be included in an edited volume on the theme of the Research Forum.

(Many thanks to Francesco Costamagna, University of  Torino, for the tip-off)

The Hague Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Co-operation in respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children, ratified by the UK this year, came yesterday (1 November 2012) into force in this country, subject to the following declarations and reservations:

.- A judgment given in a Court of a Member State of the European Union, in respect of a matter relating to the Convention, shall be recognised and enforced in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland by application of the relevant internal rules of Community law.
.-In accordance with Article 29, paragraph 2, of the Convention, the Government of the United Kingdom declares that it will interpret this paragraph as referring only to cases where the requesting Central Authority does not know to which applicable territorial unit their application should be addressed. In such cases the United Kingdom designates the Central Authority for England to transmit to the relevant Central Authority.
.- In accordance with Article 34, paragraph 2, of the Convention, the Government of the United Kingdom declares that requests made under paragraph 1 of Article 34 shall be communicated to its authorities only through the relevant Central Authority.
.- In accordance with Article 54, paragraph 2, of the Convention, the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland declares that it objects to the use of French.

In a judgment of 23 October 2012, the German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof) had to deal with the question of whether German courts have jurisdiction over claims of a consumer against a tour operator arising out of a tenancy of a holiday house abroad. Referring to Articles 15 (1) (c) and 16 (1) of the Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (hereinafter: Brussels I-Regulation) the court answered the question in the affirmative.

The facts of the case were as follows: The plaintiffs, a German couple domiciled in Schwerin (Germany), rented from the defendant, a Danish tour operator, a holiday house located in Belgium and belonging to a third party. Upon arrival, the plaintiffs realized that the house suffered from substantial defects. When the defendant failed to fix the, the plaintiffs cut their vacation short and returned to Germany.

Back home, the plaintiffs sued the defendant for reimbursement of the travel price and compensation for wasted holiday time in Local Court (Amtsgericht) of Schwerin. They argued that under Article 16 (1) of the Brussels I-Regulation German courts were competent to hear the case since the contract in question was a consumer contract in the sense of Article 15 (1) lit. c) of the Brussels I-Regulation. The defendant, in contrast, argued that German courts did not have jurisdiction. Pointing to Article 22 of the Brussels I-Regulation, he argued that in proceedings which have as their object tenancies of immovable property the courts of the Member State in which the property was situated had exclusive jurisdiction.

The Local Court of Schwerin – and later the Appellate Court (Landgericht) of Schwerin – followed the plaintiffs’ view and ordered the defendant to pay the requested sums. The defendant, therefore, appealed to Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof) which, however, confirmed the lower courts’ decisions.  A consumer, who rented a holiday house belonging to a third party from a commercial tour operator, could rely on Article 16 of the Brussels I-Regulation and bring proceedings in the courts of his home country. Article 22 No. 1 of the Brussels I-Regulation, in contrast, did not apply. According to the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, a provision, which compelled a party to bring an action in a member state in which neither party was domiciled, had to be interpreted narrowly.  Application of Article 22 No. 1 of the Brussels I-Regulation, therefore, was confined to disputes between the owner and the tenant of immovable property. In contrast, the provision did not apply to disputes between a tour operator and a consumer.

The full decision will soon be available on the website of the Federal Court of Justice (in German).

In November 2012 Oxford University Press and the Faculty of Law of the University of Oxford will host the 2012 Clarendon Law Lectures to  be delivered by Lord Collins of Mapesbury. Focusing on “Justiciability in National and International Law” the lectures will take place in the Gulbenkian Lecture Theatre, St. Cross Building, St. Cross Road, Oxford OX1 3UL. Further information are available on the Oxford Faculty of Law Homepage.

The programme reads as follows:

• LECTURE ONE, Thursday, 8 November 2012, 17:00-18:00 (followed by a drinks reception)
• LECTURE TWO, Thursday, 15 November 2012, 17:00-18:30
• LECTURE THREE, Thursday, 22 November 2012, 17:30-18:30

A new volume of the Anuario Español de Derecho Internacional Privado (vol. 2011) has just been released. It includes a number of unique studies, most of which are in-depth developments of the ideas briefly presented both by Spanish and foreign scholars at the International Seminar on Private International Law, held last March at the Universidad Complutense de Madrid. Just a taste of the contributions (clik here for the whole summary):

Sixto A. Sánchez Lorenzo, La Propuesta de Reglamento relativo a una normativa común de compraventa europea y el Derecho internacional privado, pp. 35–61.

Sabine Corneloup, Roma II y el Derecho de los mercados financieros: el ejemplo de los daños causados por la violación de las obligaciones de información, pp. 63–87.

Juan José Álvarez Rubio, Jurisdicción, competente y ley aplicable en materia de difamación y protección de los derechos de la personalidad, pp. 89–118.

Pilar Jiménez Blanco, Acciones de cesación de actividades ilícitas transfronterizas, pp. 119–146.

Ángel Espiniella Menéndez, Problemas de ley aplicable a la responsabilidad por actos ajenos, pp. 147–166.

 Santiago Álvarez González, Las legítimas en el Reglamento sobre sucesiones y testamentos, pp. 369–406.

 Eva Inés Obergfell, La libre elección de la ley aplicable en el Derecho internacional privado de sucesiones: una perspectiva desde Alemania, pp. 407–414.

 Iván Heredia Cervantes, Lex successionis y lex rei sitae en el Reglamento de sucesiones, pp. 415–445.

Prof. Angelo Davì (University of Rome “La Sapienza”) has recently published in the Recueil des cours (vol. 352) the course on renvoi held at the Hague Academy of International Law: “Le renvoi en droit international privé contemporain“.

An English presentation has been kindly provided by the author (a French version is available on the publisher’s website):

The Course deals with the modern development of scientific thinking on renvoi, examines its various functions in contemporary legal systems and assesses the importance of its current role. The different models of renvoi present in domestic legislations as well as in uniform rules on conflict of laws, of either a conventional or supra-national origin, are analysed on the basis of the fundamental distinction between models which merely take into account foreign choice of law rules and models based on a complete reconstruction of the content of foreign private international law. Ample space is accorded to developments in the EU system of private international law, as well as to an analysis of the relationship between renvoi and other methods and techniques currently employed in this area of the law, mainly for the purpose of assessing the effects their diffusion is likely to produce on the role played by renvoi as an instrument of coordination in contemporary private international law.

Title: Le renvoi en droit international privé contemporain, by Angelo Davì, Brill Academic Publishers – Martinus Nijhoff (series: Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law, vol. 352), Leiden, 2012, pp. 528.

ISBN: 9789004227262. Price: EUR 145. Available at Brill.

On November 2-3, 2012, the Private International Law Interest Group of the American Society of International Law (ASIL) is hosting its conference at Duke Law School, together with the Center for International and Comparative Law, and the Duke Journal of Comparative and International Law.

WHAT IS PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW?

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 2012

1:15 Welcome / Introduction: Ralf Michaels

1:30 Panel 1: Philosophical Foundations of Private International Law
– John Linarelli, Theories of Justice and Private International Law
– Sagi Peari, The Choice-Based Perspective of Choice-of-Law
– Robert S. Wai, Already Transnational Private Law
Chair and Commentator: Trey Childress

3:45 Panel 2: The Goals of Private International Law
– Louise Ellen Teitz, The Future of the Hague Conference
– Alex Mills, The Identities of Private International Law – Lessons from the US and EU Revolutions
– Stéphanie Francq, Hierarchy of Norms—the Missing Tool of Private International Law?
Chair and Commentator: Chris Whytock

SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2012

9:00 Panel 3: Constitutional and Democratic Aspects of Private International Law
– Jacco Bomhoff, The Constitution of the Conflict of Laws
– Charles T. Kotuby, General Principles and International Due Process as Sources of Private International Law
– Mark Fathi Massoud, Private International Law in Authoritarian Regimes: International Arbitration and the Outsourcing of the Rule of Law
– Annelise Riles, After New Governance: International Financial Governance and the Surprising Attraction of a Conflict of Laws Approach
Chair and Commentator: Julie Maupin

11:15 Panel 4: Private International Law and Legal Pluralism
– Cristián Gimenez Corte, Pushing the Limits: The Function of Private International Law in the Era of Globalization and the Need to Review its Theoretical Foundations
– Yao-Ming Hsu, Pluralistic Justice and Private International Law
– Dwight Newman, Global Legal Pluralism, Collective Rights, and Private International Law
Chair and Commentator: Ralf Michaels

1:00 Lunch: 3rd floor Mezzanine
ASIL prize presentation

2:00 Wrap-up panel
All participants