UNODC is committed in this regard to ensuring that a gender perspective is actively and visibly mainstreamed in all its practices, policies and programmes. The courses are part of the UNODC Training-of-Trainers programme and resulted in the certification of 61 national trainers in the six Western Balkan jurisdictions, who will further use the knowledge obtained in these trainings for the development of national curricula in their respective jurisdictions on conducting financial investigations.
The blog post includes specific references to the actual journal article to enable the reader to branch off into the detailed discussion where relevant.
It also takes account of recent developments in the Brexit negotiation that took place after the journal article was completed. In addition to legal issues that may arise independently under the Hague Convention, some issues may manifest themselves at the interface between the Hague Convention and the Brussels Ia Regulation.
Cross-Border European Contracts: The Importance of Governing Law and Jurisdiction Clauses 25th April, In the current European economic climate many businesses that trade with companies based in EU Members States have experienced problems with supply and payment, and there is an upwards trend in cross-border litigation. President Eiding is a legendary Labor leader, both locally and nationally, and has served the Labor Movement for over forty years. He is involved in many civic, charitable, educational and . It is important that this proposed EU regime is not seen as a model for cross-border jurisdiction challenges per se. Indeed, we would strongly advise against similar mechanisms to regulate the lawful access relation between, say, the EU and the US.
Both sets of issues are likely to garner the attention of cross-border commercial litigators, transactional lawyers and private international law academics.
The article examines anti-suit injunctions, concurrent proceedings and the implications of Brexit in the context of the Hague Convention and its relationship with the Brussels Ia Regulation. See Minutes No 9 of the Second Commission Meeting of Monday 20 June morning in Proceedings of the Twentieth Session of the Hague Conference on Private International Law Permanent Bureau of the Conference, Intersentia—24 Conversely, where the remedy impedes the sound operation of the Convention by effectively derailing proceedings in the chosen court, there was also a consensus of the official delegates at the meeting that the Convention will not permit national courts of the Contracting States to grant anti-suit injunctions.
If an aggrieved party does not commence proceedings in the chosen forum or commences such proceedings after the non-chosen court has rendered a decision on the validity of the choice of court agreement, the recognition and enforcement of that ruling highlights an interesting contrast between the Brussels Ia Jurisdiction and cross border brussels regime and the Hague Convention.
In fact, only a judgment given by a court of a Contracting State designated in an exclusive choice of court agreement shall be recognised and enforced in other Contracting States. This provides a ready explanation for the compatibility of anti-suit injunctions with the Hague Convention but does not proceed any further to transpose the same conclusion into the very different context of the Brussels Ia Regulation which prioritizes the principle of mutual trust.
The dynamics of the relationship between Article 31 2 of the Brussels Ia Regulation and Articles 5 and 6 of the Hague Convention is mapped in the article at pages However, the fundamental nature of the Article 31 2 lis pendens mechanism under the Brussels Ia Regulation may warrant the pursuance of a different line of analysis.
The exceptional nature of the right to sue in the non-chosen forum under the Hague Convention can be effectively reconciled with Article 31 2 of the Brussels Ia Regulation. This will usually result in the stay of the proceedings in the non-chosen court as soon as the chosen court is seised.
As a consequence, the incidence of parallel proceedings and irreconcilable judgments are curbed, which are significant objectives in their own right under the Brussels Ia Regulation.
It is hoped that the yet to develop jurisprudence of the CJEU on the emergent Hague Convention and the Brussels Ia Regulation will offer definitive and authoritative answers to the issues discussed in the article.
The implications of Brexit on this topic are not yet fully clear. The UK will do what is necessary to remain a party to the Convention after Brexit. In its recently published negotiating paper — only available after the article in the Journal of Private International Law was completed — the UK Government has explicitly stated that: The UK Government has indicated that it would like to remain part of the Lugano Convention see Providing a cross-border civil judicial cooperation framework at para Revision of the Lugano Convention would be a good thing, as would Norway and Switzerland becoming parties to the Hague Convention.
It seems that at least until the Lugano Convention is revised and a means is found for the UK to be a party to it difficult if the UK does not stay in EFTAthe likely outcome post-Brexit is that the regime applicable between the UK and the EU apart from Denmark in relation to exclusive choice of court agreements within the scope of the Hague Convention will be the Hague Convention.
The UK will be able to grant anti-suit injunctions to uphold exclusive choice of court agreements in favour of the courts in the UK even when one of the parties has brought an action contrary to that agreement in an EU Member State. Whilst the Hague Convention only offers a comprehensive jurisdictional regime for cases involving exclusive choice of court agreements, it does give substantial protection to the jurisdiction of UK courts designated in such an agreement which will be respected in the rest of the EU regardless of the outcome of the Brexit negotiations.
It is greatly to be welcomed that the UK Government has affirmed its commitment to an internationalist and not just a regional approach to civil judicial co-operation: One good thing that could come from Brexit is the powerful combination of the EU and the UK both adopting a truly internationalist perspective in the Hague Conference on Private International Law in order to genuinely enhance civil judicial co-operation throughout the world.
The UK can be one of the leaders of the common law world while using its decades of experience of European co-operation to help build bridges to the civil law countries in Europe, Africa, Asia and Latin America.Cross Border Employment Issues-Applicable Law, Jurisdiction, and Statutory Regime.
Facebook 0. Google+ 0. LinkedIn 0. Author Terry Gorry Posted on March 19, Categories Employment Claims Tags brussels 1 recast, cross border, posted workers directive, rome 1 regulation Post navigation.
Border controls are measures taken by a country or a bloc of countries to monitor its borders in order to regulate the movement of people, animals and goods. Cross-Border European Contracts: The Importance of Governing Law and Jurisdiction Clauses 25th April, In the current European economic climate many businesses that trade with companies based in EU Members States have experienced problems with supply and payment, and there is an upwards trend in cross-border litigation.
21mins Six militants killed in J&K encounter ; 59mins Women’s World T India loses to England in semi-final ; 1hr Khashoggi killing: CIA did not blame Saudi crown prince, says Trump ; Ruckus.
Apr 27, · The changes introduced by the Recast Regulation give efficacy to jurisdiction agreements and arbitration agreements, and facilitate the enforcement of judgments, so are likely to be welcomed by those involved in cross-border litigation.
Paris as an international jurisdiction: creation of chambers specialized in cross-border disputes On 7 February , in the presence of the French Minister of Justice, agreement protocols were signed by the Court of Appeal, the Commercial Court and the Paris Bar which provide for the creation of a specialist Chamber (or division) of the Paris.