The European Commission has just opened a public consultation on the Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (recast). A call for evidence is available here (which includes the three policy options being considered). Read more
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Mayela Celishttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngMayela Celis2026-09-02 16:26:032026-09-02 16:27:32Public consultation on jurisdiction rules and recognition and enforcement of judgments – Brussels Ia Regulation (review) is open
This note has been co-authored with Dr. Samuel Vuattoux-Bock, LL.M. (Kiel). It is based on a legal expert opinion for White and Case LLP, Frankfurt. A more comprehensive version – in German – is forthcoming in the Zeitschrift für Internationales Wirtschaftsrecht (IWRZ).
I. Introduction
International enforcement regarding the performance of actions that may be taken by others pursuant to Section 887 of the German Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO) raises complex questions within the Brussels Ibis Regulation. These issues concern the correct classification of such enforcement measures, the legal status of a third-party debtor in the context of the enforcement of monetary claims, and potential grounds for refusing enforcement that may arise with respect to international jurisdiction and any defects in service of process. Currently, French courts are seized of the question as to whether a German judgment—in which the German creditor of a Russian debtor was awarded an advance on costs pursuant to Section 887(2) ZPO—can be fully enforced in France by means of a garnishment order directed against a French third-party debtor.
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Jan von Heinhttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngJan von Hein2026-07-02 12:51:542026-07-06 12:33:23The enforcement of an advance on costs for substitute performance at the expense of a Russian debtor in German-French legal relations
Written by Hadrien Pauchard (assistant researcher and doctoral student at Sciences Po Law School)
The first issue of the Revue Critique de droit international privé of 2026 has just come off the press and is available online. It contains three articles, nine case notes, and eight book reviews. In line with the Revue Critique’s recent policy, the doctrinal part will soon be made available in English on the editor’s website (for registered users and institutions). Read more
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Etienne Farnouxhttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngEtienne Farnoux2026-05-05 06:23:302026-05-05 06:23:30Revue critique de droit international privé – Issue 2026/1
The Área de Derecho Internacional Privado of the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (UAM) announces two initiatives of particular interest for scholars and practitioners of private international law.
1. Seminar: Nuevas perspectivas de la insolvencia internacional: reestructuraciones preconcursales y concursales
On Friday, 6 March 2026 (12:45), a seminar will be held at the Faculty of Law of UAM (Seminario II) in the framework of the research project “Nuevas perspectivas de la insolvencia internacional: reestructuraciones preconcursales y concursales” (PID 2022-140017OB100), coordinated by Professors Iván Heredia Cervantes and Elisa Torralba Mendiola. Read more
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Rui Diashttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngRui Dias2026-03-01 20:44:382026-03-02 08:33:53Seminar on International Insolvency and 2026 Seminar Series on the Reform of the Brussels I bis Regulation (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid)
Steven Stuij, De positie van art. 10:2 BW in het Nederlands burgerlijk procesrecht / p. 423-444
Abstract
Article 10:2 of the Dutch Civil Code stipulates that the rules of private international law as well as the applicable law designated by those rules are to be applied ex officio. There has been a debate as to the positioning of this provision in relation to other rules of civil procedure on party autonomy as a result of two cases of the Dutch Supreme Court (‘Hoge Raad’). This contribution will address Read more
Vesna Lazic (Asser Institute, Utrecht University) has published an interesting case note on the complex case of CJEU Judgment C-394/22 Oilchart International NV v O.W. Bunker Nederland BV, ING Bank NV in Revue de Droit Commercial Belge. This case dealt with the interaction between the Brussels I-bis Regulation and the Insolvency Regulation. You can read it here: 2025 Note rdc_tbh2025_2p308 .
In this case, the Court held that:
Article 1(2)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, must be interpreted as not applying to an action brought in a Member State against a company seeking payment for goods delivered which does not mention either the insolvency proceedings opened previously against that company in another Member State or the fact that the claim was already declared in the insolvency estate.
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Xandra Kramerhttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngXandra Kramer2025-08-18 15:00:142025-08-17 20:45:42Case note on Oilchart International v. Bunker Nederland BV
Written by Dr. Nima Nasrollahi-Shahri (Sorbonne Law School) and Vincent Bassani-Winckler (PhD Candidate, Sorbonne Law School), both authors participated in the Working Group.
A few days ago, the Sorbonne Law School released the final report of a collective research project chaired by Professors Mathias Audit and Sylvain Bollée, entitled “Towards an EU Law on International Commercial Arbitration?”.
Conducted within the IRJS (Institut de Recherche Juridique de la Sorbonne), and more specifically its research group on private international law, SERPI (Sorbonne – Étude des Relations Privées Internationales), this project sets out to examine whether and how to improve the relationship between commercial arbitration and EU law.
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Etienne Farnouxhttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngEtienne Farnoux2025-07-15 16:09:452025-07-15 16:09:45“Towards an EU Law on International Commercial Arbitration?” A Sorbonne Law School Research Project
This report was written by Carlos Santaló Goris, postdoctoral researcher at the University of Luxembourg
Recent developments on the application of the EAPO Regulation
On 3 December 2024, the conference ‘European Account Preservation Order: Practical Challenges and Prospects for Reform’ took place at the University of Luxembourg, organized by Prof. Gilles Cuniberti (University of Luxembourg). The conference also served as an occasion to present the book ‘European Account Preservation Order – A Multi-jurisdictional Guide with Commentary’, published by Bruylant/Larcier. The book was co-edited by Dr. Nicolas Kyriakides (University of Nicosia), Dr. Heikki A. Huhtamäki (Huhtamäki Brothers Attorneys Ltd), and Dr. Nicholas Mouttotos (University of Bremen), and offers a comprehensive overview on the application of the European Account Preservation Order (‘EAPO’) at the national level. It contains a report for each Member State where the EAPO Regulation applies, addressing specific aspects of the EAPO procedure that depend on domestic law.
The conference was structured into two panel discussions. The first panel focused on the specific issues regarding the application of the EAPO Regulation identified by practitioners with first-hand experience with this instrument. The second panel discussion explored the potential reform of the EAPO Regulation and which specific changes should be implemented to improve its application. This report aims to offer an overview of the main highlights and outputs of the presentations and discussions of the conference. Read more
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Thalia Krugerhttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngThalia Kruger2025-01-19 17:38:022025-01-20 07:23:22Conference report ‘European Account Preservation Order: Practical Challenges and Prospects for Reform’ (University of Luxembourg, 3 December 2024)
C.G. van der Plas, A.F. Veldhuis, B.H.B. Verheul, Automatische erkenning en tenuitvoerlegging van vonnissen in het Europa van nu: de noodzaak van een nieuwe blik op wederzijds vertrouwen na J/H Limited / p. 241-267Read more
In its judgment of 8 February 2024, the CJEU had to decide whether “the application of the Brussels Ibis Regulation be based solely on the fact that two parties with their seat in the same Member State agree on the jurisdiction of courts of another EU Member State.”
The case concerned two loans granted to Dúha reality, a Slovak company, by a third party also domiciled in Slovakia, in 2016 and 2017 respectively. Both loan contracts contained an identical choice of forum clause stating that any ‘dispute shall be settled by a court of the Czech Republic having substantive and territorial jurisdiction’. In 2021, the receivables arising from those loan agreements were assigned to Inkreal, another purely Slovak business corporation, who upon non-payment by the debtor brought action in the Czech Republic. Seeking, inter alia, to determine the specific Czech court having territorial jurisdiction, the Czech Supreme Court (Nejvyšší soud) referred the question to the CJEU.
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png00Matthias Wellerhttps://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.pngMatthias Weller2024-02-17 06:10:322024-02-17 16:48:47CJEU, Case C-566/22, Inkreal v. Dúha reality: Choice of another Member State’s court in an otherwise purely domestic case is sufficient to apply Art. 25 Brussels Ibis Regulation