Views
Nothing Found
Sorry, no posts matched your criteria
News
DynamInt: 7 PhD positions at Humboldt-University Berlin
The Faculty of Law of Humboldt-University Berlin invites applications for 7 doctoral positions (Research fellowships with 3/4-part-time-employment – E 13 TV-L HU1, third party funding, short-term until 30 November 2021, prolongation is possible; engagement intended until 1 December 2019)
Job description:
- Research activities in the doctoral programme “Dynamic Integration – Law in-between Harmonisation and Plurality in Europe (DynamInt)” funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Foundation, GRK 2483);
- Activities for your own scientific qualification (PhD within the thematic areas of the doctoral programme).
You can find more information about the post graduate program DynamInt online: https://www.rewi.hu-berlin.de/de/lf/oe/rhp/index.htm
Requirements
- First German State Examination in Law or Master Degree in Law (preferably with distinction or better);
- Sufficient command of German and at least one further European common language.
Application period
1st November 2019
(not fixed, extension possible, please contact DynamInt@rewi.hu-berlin.de)
Application details
Applications must include a research proposal for the PhD discussing the state of research, framing a scientific question as well as a research plan.
Applications must indicate the identification number of this Call for application (DR/158/19) and should be sent to Humboldt University of Berlin, Faculty of Law, Professor Dr. Matthias Ruffert, Unter den Linden 6, 10099 Berlin or to the following e-mail address: DynamInt@rewi.hu-berlin.de (one PDF, max. 10 MB).
NB
The working language of the programme (courses, workshops etc.) is German. The PhD thesis may be written in English.
English text for information with additional explanations – only the German text is authoritative.
Cross-Border Enforcement in the EU (“IC2BE”) – programme workshop Netherlands 14 November
Workshop: Application of the “Second Generation” Regulations in The Netherlands
The Erasmus School of Law (Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands) will host a second national workshop on Thursday, 14 November 2019 from 9.30-13.00 hrs, in the framework of the research project “Informed Choices in Cross-Border Enforcement” (IC2BE) (see our first workshop). This project (JUSTAG-2016-02) is funded by the Justice Programme (2014-2020) of the European Commission and aims to assess the functioning in practice of the “second generation” of EU regulations on procedural law for cross-border cases, i.e. the European Enforcement Order (“EEO”), European Order for Payment (“EPO”), European Small Claims (as amended by Regulation (EU) 2015/2421) (“ESCP”) and the European Account Preservation Order (“EAPO”) Regulations.
The project is carried out by a European consortium involving the Max Planck Institute Luxembourg and the universities of Antwerp, Complutense of Madrid, Milan, Rotterdam, and Wroclaw, and is coordinated by Prof. Jan von Hein from the University of Freiburg.
The workshop will present the findings of the research in the Netherlands and discuss these with experts from legal practice and academics, with the aim of assessing and improving the application of these instruments.
The language of the workshop is mostly Dutch. Practitioners and academics interested in cross-border litigation are invited to participate in this event. The program can be found here. Contact address for registration and further information: ontanu@law.eur.nl.
The final conference for this IC2BE project will take place in Antwerp on 21-22 November 2019. For more information and registration see our previous post and the project website.
Rivista di diritto internazionale privato e processuale (RDIPP) No 3/2019: Abstracts
The third issue of 2019 of the Rivista di diritto internazionale privato e processuale (RDIPP, published by CEDAM) was just released and it features:
Stefania Bariatti, Professor at the University of Milan, Volontà delle parti e internazionalità del rapporto giuridico: alcuni sviluppi recenti nella giurisprudenza della Corte di giustizia sui regolamenti europei in materia di diritto internazionale privato (Party Autonomy and Characterization of a Legal Relationship as International: Some Recent Developments in the Jurisprudence of the Court of Justice on the EU Regulations in Private International Law; in Italian)
Two recent cases brought before the Court of Justice of the EU lead to meditate about the admissibility of choice of court clauses in favour of a foreign court and choice of law clauses in favour of a foreign law inserted in purely domestic contracts. In the Vinyls case, the Court of Justice has stated that the choice of a foreign law, that is valid according to the Rome I Regulation, is valid also for purposes of Article 16 of Regulation No 2015/848 (European Insolvency Regulation Recast), provided that such choice is not fraudulent or abusive. This solution, that is in line with the previous case-law of the Court, requires that the parties to a domestic contract carefully check the reasons for choosing a foreign law and it excludes that national provisions of law concerning the voidness or voidability of detrimental acts in case of insolvency qualify as mandatory rules under Article 3(3) of the Rome I Regulation. The second case, that will not be decided by the Court since it was repealed by the national judge, concerns the choice of a foreign forum in a domestic contract subject to the ISDA rules, that are widely used in international business transactions. Some recent judgments of the Court suggest that such choice is apt to qualify a domestic contract as ‘international’ for purposes of applying the Brussels I recast Regulation and is valid according to its Article 25.
In addition to the foregoing, the following comment is featured:
Martina Mantovani, PhD Candidate at the University of Paris II Pantheon-Assas and Research Fellow at the Max Planck Institute Luxembourg for Procedural Law, Horizontal Conflicts of Member States’ GDPR-Complementing Laws: The Quest for a Viable Conflict-of-Laws Solution (in English)
This paper offers a comparative overview of the national provisions defining the reach of the laws adopted by Member States on the basis of the opening clauses enshrined in the GDPR. It identifies the lack of coordination among the Member States’ complementing laws as a major hindrance to the proper functioning of the internal digital market, due to the paramount problems of over – and under – regulation, and increased potential for forum and law shopping stemming from the existing legislative framework. Against this backdrop, this paper submits that existing national rules of applicability may be deemed contrary to EU law, and should be interpreted, to the extent possible, “in conformity” with the wording and the purpose of the GDPR. In this vein the scheme and objectives of the GDPR, should be directly applied.