Conflict of Laws
  • About
  • Editorial board
  • Subscription
  • Submission
  • Materials
  • Contact
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu

Tag Archive for: lis pendens

Conflicts of jurisdiction in Senegal: lesson from the Senegalese Supreme Court on Lis Pendens and the Exequatur of foreign judgments

July 27, 2026/0 Comments/in Views/by Béligh Elbalti

 

This post was kindly prepared by Véronique Carole Ngono, Professor of Private Law (agrégée), University of Douala, Cameroon.

 

I. Introduction

The recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in French-speaking sub-Saharan Africa has not been the subject of many studies. Although a few such studies do exist, this is in contrast to the field of conflict of laws and personal status law in particular. Consequently, the two rulings issued by the Supreme Court of Senegal on August 12, 2020, in connected disputes went practically unnoticed, even though they offer valuable insights into determining the jurisdiction of Senegalese courts in international disputes and the enforcement of foreign judgments.

The purpose of this note is therefore to shed light on the law and practice of conflict jurisdictions in Senegal.

Read more

https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Béligh Elbalti https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Béligh Elbalti2026-07-27 04:55:012026-07-27 07:37:16Conflicts of jurisdiction in Senegal: lesson from the Senegalese Supreme Court on Lis Pendens and the Exequatur of foreign judgments

Advocate General Emiliou’s Opinion on Case C-799/24: Res Judicata Effect Applies Despite Breach of Art 31(2) Brussels Ia

April 24, 2026/in Views/by Tobias Lutzi

by Arvid Kerschnitzki, University of Augsburg

On 23 April 2026, Advocate General Emiliou published his opinion on Case C-799/24 – Babcock Montajes S.A. v Kanadevia Inova Steinmüller GmbH. It adds another piece to the puzzle that is the CJEU’s broad interpretation of the term ‘judgment’ in the Brussels Ia Regulation. At the same time, the case highlights the persisting problems with procedural coordination under the regulation.

Read more

https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2025/10/eu-court-of-justice-213379_1920.jpg 1275 1920 Tobias Lutzi https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Tobias Lutzi2026-04-24 09:33:582026-04-24 09:33:58Advocate General Emiliou’s Opinion on Case C-799/24: Res Judicata Effect Applies Despite Breach of Art 31(2) Brussels Ia

UEMATSU on Cross-border Patent Litigation and Lis Alibi Pendens: A Korean–Japanese Case Study for Future Asian Principles of Private International Law

August 30, 2025/in News/by Béligh Elbalti

The latest issue of the Ritsumeikan Law Review (No. 43, 2025), a law review in English published by the Ritsumeikan University Law Association since 1986, features a study by Professor Mao UEMATSU (School of Law, Ritsumeikan University) entitled Cross-border Patent Litigation and Lis Alibi Pendens: A Korean–Japanese Case Study for Future Asian Principles of Private International Law.

The article examines a series of patent litigation cases in Korea and Japan, analyzing them to “illustrate the complexity of cross-border patent litigation.” It further argues that, even after reforms to procedural laws in both Korea and Japan, structurally similar cross-border conflicts remain unresolved. The paper concludes with preliminary reflections on possible improvements in legal coordination within Asia.

By introducing case law from both jurisdictions and sharing information on recent legal developments in the region, the study provides valuable material for comparative research and contributes to a better understanding of the dynamics of Asian private international law.

The paper is freely available at the Ritsumeikan Law Review online version here.

https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Béligh Elbalti https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Béligh Elbalti2025-08-30 04:58:332025-08-30 04:58:33UEMATSU on Cross-border Patent Litigation and Lis Alibi Pendens: A Korean–Japanese Case Study for Future Asian Principles of Private International Law

Staying Proceedings under the Civil Code of Quebec

October 28, 2019/1 Comment/in Views/by Stephen Pitel

Written by Professor Stephen G.A. Pitel, Western University

The decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in R.S. v P.R., 2019 SCC 49 (available here) could be of interest to those who work with codified provisions on staying proceedings. It involves interpreting the language of several such provisions in the Civil Code of Quebec. Art. 3135 is the general provision for a stay of proceedings, but on its wording and as interpreted by the courts it is “exceptional” and so the hurdle for a stay is high. In contrast, Art. 3137 is a specific provision for a stay of proceedings based on lis pendens (proceedings underway elsewhere) and if it applies it does not have the same exceptional nature. This decision concerns Art. 3137 and how it should be interpreted. Read more

https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Stephen Pitel https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Stephen Pitel2019-10-28 19:29:172019-10-28 19:30:47Staying Proceedings under the Civil Code of Quebec

Italian Forum on the Brussels I Review Proposal (2): Lis Pendens and Related Actions

February 1, 2011/in /by Giorgio Buono

Following our previous post on the forum on the Brussels I review currently hosted by the website of the Italian Society of International Law (SIDI-ISIL), another comment has been added, on the amendments proposed by the Commission in respect of lis pendens and related actions. The contribution is authored by Fabrizio Marongiu Buonaiuti (University of Rome “La Sapienza”), who has recently published an extensive monograph on the regime of lis pendens and related actions in Italian law, in the European regulations and in other international instruments (Litispendenza e connessione internazionale. Strumenti di coordinamento tra giurisdizioni statali in materia civile, Napoli, 2008):

  • Fabrizio Marongiu Buonaiuti, Litispendenza e connessione nella proposta di revisione del regolamento n. 44/2001.
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Giorgio Buono https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Giorgio Buono2011-02-01 00:10:462011-02-01 00:10:46Italian Forum on the Brussels I Review Proposal (2): Lis Pendens and Related Actions

Categories

  • Views
  • News

Most Recent Posts

  • Conflicts of jurisdiction in Senegal: lesson from the Senegalese Supreme Court on Lis Pendens and the Exequatur of foreign judgments July 27, 2026
  • Adoption in the proposal for a European Parenthood Regulation July 21, 2026
  • Copyright, Targeting and Geo-Blocking: The CJEU Stirs the Pot July 15, 2026
  • A Follow-Up: The German Judges Association’s Response to the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions July 15, 2026
  • Private International Law Dimensions of Singapore’s New Legislation to Combat Online Harms July 14, 2026
  • The 1961 HCCH Apostille Convention: Why All African Countries Should Ratify It? — Insights from Judicial Practice in Africa July 14, 2026
  • The enforcement of an advance on costs for substitute performance at the expense of a Russian debtor in German-French legal relations July 2, 2026
  • “Yes, in principle, but not quite there yet…” – Some Observations on the Public Consultation on the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions June 29, 2026
  • Judgment Mobility Rules in India’s Private International Law Regime: No place for a revision au fond? June 26, 2026
  • Nothing to See Here: The CJEU’s Decision in Case C-232/25 Idzinski June 18, 2026
  • Refusal to Enforce in Egypt of a Californian (U.S.) Judgment for Lack of Reciprocity: What Has Gotten into the Egyptian Supreme Court? June 15, 2026
  • PRC Double Interest neither Double nor Penal: Australian Courts Clear Its Name When Enforcing Chinese Judgments June 10, 2026
  • The AIFC Court, Gazprom v Naftogaz and the Emergence of a New Conduit Jurisdiction Debate June 6, 2026
  • Montana Supreme Court Decides International Child Custody Case June 3, 2026
  • China’s Countering Improper Foreign Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Regulation Blocked EU’s Extraterritorial Data Acquisition May 29, 2026
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top