Law Applicable in the Absence of Choice – The New Article 4 of the Rome I Regulation

The applicable law to a contract in the absence of the parties' choice is governed by Article 4 of the Rome Convention, which has been implemented in the UK by the Contracts (Applicable Law) Act 1990. This rule adopts the 'closest connection principle' as a basic principle to decide the applicable law, but also introduces specific presumptions to simplify the process. The current rule has been criticised for its uncertainty. As a result, a substantive change has been provided in the Rome I Regulation, which aims to modernise the current choice of law rules in contractual obligations and convert the Rome Convention into a Council Regulation. The new Article 4 aims to enhance certainty and to overcome the difficulties of the current rules of the Rome Convention. However, a close scrutiny of the new Article 4 shows that it does not properly achieve its aim. The article aims to critically analyse Article 4 of the Rome I Regulation and to provide suggestions for its interpretation and understanding.     

Three Principles of Transnational Corporate Bankruptcy Law: A Review

Abstract: After having discussed the weaknesses of the universalist and territorialist approaches to transnational corporate bankruptcy law, this article argues that a free‐choice régime could combine the advantage of ex post value maximisation of the firm's assets with a comparatively higher degree of ex ante predictability to investors. In addition, it could lead to a better alignment between corporate ownership structures and corporate bankruptcy régimes. Moreover, a free‐choice régime could potentially open the door for regulatory competition in corporate bankruptcy law. However, EC Regulation 1346/00 on insolvency proceedings implements a system of modified universalism, which allows for strategic ex post forum shopping by debtors while keeping the national legislatures’ monopoly in the field of corporate bankruptcy in place. It is suggested that even though it cannot be predicted that a free‐choice régime will pressure state lawmakers to improve their corporate bankruptcy laws, a system of free choice could redirect the law‐making agenda in the EU by focusing the coordination efforts of lawmakers on those issues—such as security interests in property and statutory priority rights—which could negatively affect the proper functioning of the Internal Market, while enabling Member States to customise corporate bankruptcy laws to local preferences and needs.     

论英国法院的止诉禁令

分析止诉禁令与仲裁的关系,归纳申请伦敦仲裁一方当事人面对另一方在其他国家法院起诉的对策,探讨《布鲁塞尔规则》对英国法院就欧盟法院诉讼作出止诉禁令的冲击后,提出保护伦敦仲裁与针对the"Front Com or"案可以考虑的6个对策及向英国法院申请止诉禁令的原则等。     

Preventing innovative cooperations: the legal exemptions unintended side effect

In 2004, European competition law had been considerable changed by the introduction of the new Council Regulation No. 1/2003. One of the major renewals was the replacement of the centralized notification system for inter-company cooperations in favor of a so-called legal exemption system. We analyze the implications of this reform and its arising uncertainty on the agreements firms implement, especially on innovative agreements like vertical R&D agreements. By means of a decision theoretic approach, we show that the law’s intention to reduce the incentive to establish illegal cartels will be reached but innovating cooperations might be prevented. To avoid this unintended side effect, fines but not the monitoring activities should be increased.     

Financial Torts and Investor Protection: Is the Europeanisation of Third State Cases a Viable Solution?

Due to the growing globalisation of financial markets, non-EU market operators which act outside the EU are increasingly causing direct harm to European investors. This issue, and its relevant impact on investor protection, has already been considered by the European legislature at the substantive level. This article seeks to demonstrate that, at the private international law level, the Europeanisation of third state cases would increase both the degree of investor protection and investors’ equal access to justice. Focusing exclusively on financial torts, the advantages arising from the application of Brussels I bis heads of jurisdiction to non-EU defendants are assessed with regard to insider trading and Credit Rating Agency liability cases. The paper also examines the main critical elements related to such an extension of the Brussels I bis regime, especially from a systematic perspective, and suggests possible future approaches to this issue.

     

International agreements

This article discusses the place of non liquet in the statute and practice of the International Court of Justice. It argues that although there is no prohibition of non liquet in the statute of the court, the completeness of the court of international law in article 38(1) of the statute makes no room for the court to declare non liquet in practice. The author argues that the inclusion of general principles of law and judicial decisions in article 38(1) makes the sources of international law available to the court complete, thereby affording the court the means to avoid non liquet through judicial creativity.     

Domestic violence and child participation: contemporary challenges for the 1980 hague child abduction convention

ABSTRACT

This article addresses two contemporary challenges for the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention: (i) domestic violence and (ii) child participation. It also outlines three components of a global socio-legal policy and research initiative undertaken to address these issues and, where relevant, their intersection. The published literature on these topics, including the children’s objections exception, is explored, as are the ways in which these challenges are addressed within some of the 101 Contracting States to the Convention and through the Guide to Good Practice on Article 13(1)(b) of the Convention. Regard is paid to the data provided by the statistical analysis of applications made under the Convention in 2015 by Lowe and Stephens, and the changes which will occur once the Recast of The European Brussels 11a Regulation comes into operation. The likely impact for 1980 Hague Convention abduction proceedings of the UK having left the European Union at 23.00 GMT on 31 January 2020 is contemplated. Other current international initiatives are discussed, including the development of a child-friendly version of the Convention through The International Association of Child Law Researchers. Training is a key to changing attitudes and upskilling family justice professionals to ensure the Convention operates in a fully child-centric way. This will maintain and strengthen the Convention by keeping it ‘fit for purpose’.     

The EU Proposal for a General Data Protection Regulation and the roots of the ‘right to be forgotten’

The EU Proposal for a General Data Protection Regulation has caused a wide debate between lawyers and legal scholars and many opinions have been voiced on the issue of the right to be forgotten. In order to analyse the relevance of the new rule provided by Article 17 of the Proposal, this paper considers the original idea of the right to be forgotten, pre-existing in both European and U.S. legal frameworks. This article focuses on the new provisions of Article 17 of the EU Proposal for a General Data Protection Regulation and evaluates its effects on court decisions. The author assumes that the new provisions do not seem to represent a revolutionary change to the existing rules with regard to the right granted to the individual, but instead have an impact on the extension of the protection of the information disseminated on-line.     

克制和应对“碎片化”:WTO协定与多边环境和人权协定规范整合的司法路径

WTO协定在应对环境贸易争端和人权贸易争端时的贸易价值优先取向加剧了国际法的"碎片化"和"不成体系"问题。为克制和应对国际法的"碎片化",促进WTO协定与多边环境和人权协定的规范整合,《维也纳条约法公约》第31(3)(c)条可作为整体解释方法的条约依据运用于WTO协定的司法解释中,但这需要专家组和上诉机构对条约"解释"和条约"适用"做出革新的认识,将整体解释方法作为自治的条约解释方法在人权和环境贸易争端中适用,而不是陷于第31(3)(c)条所述之当事国为"条约当事国"还是"争端当事国"之争。     

Effet utile and the (re)organisation of national judiciaries: A not so unique institutional response to a uniquely important challenge?

The current repurposing of the principle of effet utile of European Union law can be found in the revolutionary steps taken by the Court of Justice in its application of Article 19 TEU. The implicit goal of this recent body of case-law is to equip national judges with the tools to resist domestic judicial reforms that affect their freedom to adjudicate independently. Considering Simmenthal to Unibet, Associação Sindical dos Juízes Portugueses to the latest case-law relating to the organisation of national judiciaries, this article contends that, while the case-law on judicial independence is unprecedented, the Court of Justice has gone to great lengths to ensure that the developments in EU law precipitated by its rulings are grounded in established doctrine. They follow a line of case-law that builds on the principle of primacy of EU law and the obligation to guarantee the effectiveness of EU law in the domestic legal order. Further, the current trajectory is for Article 19 TEU to form the operational basis of review of any judicially minded reforms, whether they be organisational (Article 19 TEU, together with Article 47 CFREU), limit actually or potentially the freedom for dialogue between national courts and the Court of Justice (Article 19 TEU together with Article 267 TFEU and Article 47 CFREU) or where they reduce the protection of the value of the rule of law (Article 19 TEU, Article 2 TEU, Article 49 TEU and Article 47 CFREU), with potential implications for the effective application in EU law of the principle of mutual trust.     

The Future of International Investment Regulation: Towards a World Investment Organisation?

With growth in foreign investment and in the number of companies investing in foreign countries, the application of general principles of public international law has not been deemed adequate to regulate foreign investment and there is, as yet, no comprehensive international treaty on the regulation of foreign investment. Consequently, states have resorted to bilateral investment treaties (BITs), regional trade and international investment agreements (IIAs) and free trade agreements to supplement and complement the regime of protection for foreign investors. In the absence of an international investment court, states hosting foreign investment or investor states have opted for investor-state dispute settlement mechanism (ISDS). This mechanism has brought about its own challenges to the international law of foreign investment due to inconsistency in the application and interpretation of the key principles of international investment law by such arbitration tribunals, and further, there is no appellate mechanism to bring about some cohesion and consistency in jurisprudence. Therefore, there are various proposals mooted by scholars to address these challenges and they range from tweaks to BITs and IIAs, the creation of an appellate mechanism and the negotiation of a multilateral treaty to proposals for reform of ISDS only. After assessing the merits and demerits of such proposals, this study goes further, arguing for the creation of a World Investment Organisation with a standing mechanism for settlement of investment disputes in order to ensure legal certainty, predictability and the promotion of the flow of foreign investment in a sustainable and responsible manner.

     

The prosecutor and human rights – from the general to the particular

It is not unusual that one or all parties commit a genuine mistake when making contracts. While there is the strict general duty under the law to respect agreements, there equally exists the duty for courts and tribunals to be fair and to render commercial justice in the factual matrix of cases before them. In national legal systems and transnational law regimes, rescission for mistake on economically efficient and just terms is embedded in contractual obligations. The Solle v Butcher (1950) doctrine, which represented the English law approach, was rejected in The Great Peace (2002). Potential conflicts and crises now exist in commercial relations and international dispute resolution when ‘English law’ is the applicable law. This extends to jurisdictions where English decisions are highly persuasive. This article examines the correctness and effect of The Great Peace decision on the doctrine of equitable rescission for genuine mistake as propounded in Solle v Butcher, and possible clarifications needed after the complications brought by The Great Peace. It analyses the conceptual importance of the remedy of equitable rescission for mistake in commercial transactions, and identifies serious substantive errors of law by The Great Peace court. Finally, it provides other effective, fair and efficient legal methods that remain available to avoid the weaknesses of the decisions.     

Towards Administrative Human Rights in the EU. Impact of the Charter of Fundamental Rights

Abstract: This article analyses the development of administrative human rights in the EU. It demonstrates that the new right to good administration enshrined in Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights crowns a long process of constitutionalisation of basic administrative rights in the Community. The article discusses the meaning, content, and possible impact of Article 41 of the Charter. It explains, inter alia, the doctrinal basis of a ‘right to good administration’, and its more immediate origins. It also offers a textual analysis and commentary of Article 41. Other rights, which possibly come within the concept of ‘good administration’ but are not included in Article 41, are also suggested. The article concludes with an evaluation of Article 41 of the Charter. It argues that although Article 41 is a significant development in terms of individual administrative rights, it offers a one‐sided vision of the function of administrative law.     

Jurisdiction for Consumer Contracts: European Union: Modified Rules of Jurisdiction for Electronic Consumer Contracts

The Brussels Convention on Jurisdiction and the Recognition of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (the Brussels Convention) is to be replaced in 2002 by a Community Instrument: 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 (the Regulation).¹ The Regulation is an important measure approved by the European Union to simplify rules of jurisdiction and recognition of judgments for the benefit of the Internal Market. Amongst other matters, the Regulation updates existing jurisdiction rules for a consumer contracts. The rules for consumer contracts apply where a consumer and a business are domiciled in a Member State or the business has a:“branch, agency or other establishment” in a Member State. Importantly, the Regulation clarifies jurisdiction rules for consumer contracts conducted over the World Wide Web (WWW). These rules are to be welcomed, as they provide guidance on what rules of jurisdiction apply to consumer contracts over the Web, albeit that they are limited to where the parties are domiciled in Europe. This article outlines the rules of jurisdiction for consumer contracts provided by the Regulation, and where appropriate, highlights some aspects of the new rules that will possibly require further discussion and clarification by the European Court of Justice once the new rules are in force.     

Donald Davidson and section 2.01 of the model penal code

Abstract

In a 1967 article that is considered a classic of criminal justice scholarship, Abraham Blumberg portrayed defense attorneys for accused offenders as more responsive to the demands of the court entourage for smooth and expeditious functioning than to the needs of their clients for a stalwart representation. The article suggests that Blumberg's view, while provocative and with a considerable element of accuracy, may have reflected a somewhat jaundiced and overstated perspective when he was on the verge of leaving law practice for academia. The article also speculates about the current accuracy of Blumberg's observations.     

New Battles and Battlegrounds for Mandatory Arbitration After Epic Systems,New Prime,and Lamps Plus

The Supreme Court's recent decisions interpreting the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) in the employment context generally prioritize arbitration over workers’ labor law rights. The majority in Epic Systems Corporation v. Lewis upheld mandatory individual employment arbitration agreements despite their conflict with the labor law right to act in concert. The same majority in Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela rejected a state law interpretation of a contract provision to find that parties to an employment contract intend individual arbitration absent reference to group arbitration. A unanimous Court in New Prime v. Oliveira interpreted the FAA to include independent contractors under the transportation worker exemption, reinvigorating the battle over what it means to be engaged in interstate commerce to qualify for the exemption. These decisions resolved some disputes about the breadth of the FAA, but other questions remain. In the wake of Epic Systems and Lamps Plus, state courts and legislatures are testing the boundaries of the FAA's saving clause, with limited success. Confidentiality provisions, frequently associated with arbitration agreements, may unlawfully interfere with employees’ federal labor law rights. This article recommends that Congress amend the FAA to address these issues by excluding all workers engaged in interstate commerce, not just transportation workers, because the Court has strayed far from the original intent of the Act—to enforce commercial agreements in which the parties had equal bargaining power. State legislation also should provide guidance on what makes arbitration voluntary and fair, and provide a choice to employees on collective action, forum, and confidentiality.     

Council of the Chamber of Attorneys of the City of Moscow Disciplinary Proceedings Against Attorney Sh. [Summer 2008]

[Main accusation: showing disrespect for the court.—Eds.]

Being an independent professional adviser on legal questions, an attorney may not be held liable in any way . . . for an opinion expressed by him while carrying on work as an attorney, unless he has been found guilty of a criminal act (inaction) by a court verdict that has entered into legal force.

… According to general principles of jurisprudence in the Russian Federation, and also generally accepted norms of morality (interpersonal intercourse), the legislator presumes constructive cooperation among professional participants in criminal court proceedings, with each of them performing the procedural function assigned to him by law.     

Sameness and selfhood: The efficiency of constitutional identities in EU law

This article enquires into the formal dimension of constitutional identity by focusing not on what it consists of but on how it is expressed in the different discursive practices developed by constitutional courts. Contrasting constitutional identity as sameness and constitutional identity as selfhood shows that domestic courts can favour either a substantive determination of core constitutional features or a performative approach where the reflexive ability to define oneself prevails. Such a choice conditions the judicial strategies developed in the interactions with the Court of Justice, and their effectiveness. From this perspective, the accommodation in EU law, in light of the respect for Member States' national identity affirmed in Article 4(2) TEU, of these domestic identity claims rooted in the supremacy of the Constitution, depends less on what is asked for than on how it is asked for.     

Analysing the application of Brussels I in regulating e-commerce jurisdiction in the European Union – Success,deficiencies and proposed changes

This article analyses the regulatory framework of e-commerce jurisdiction in the European Union (EU). Firstly, it discusses and analyses the current regime under the Brussels Regulation, highlighting its success in consumer protection and the deficiencies for e-commerce jurisdiction, which need to be addressed. Secondly, the article compares the EU regime with that of the United States (US). It is argued that the US courts follow uncertain and distinct approaches compared to the clear rules of the Brussels Regulation. Their present approach of minimum contacts analysis as followed in the Yahoo! case poses problems for a transnational EU litigant in similar cases. Thirdly, the article examines the recent proposals adopted by the European Commission to remedy the deficiencies in the Regulation. The most important change proposed is the inclusion of third-state defendants within its ambit. It is argued that the changes to be adopted by the European Parliament are insufficient, and the author therefore provides recommendations. Lastly, the article highlights the inability of the proposed changes to address the deficiencies identified by the discussion.     

International Law and Detention of US Asylum Seekers: Contrasting Matter of D-J- with the United Nations Refugee Convention

US refugee law reflects an ever-increasing conception that theapplication of international standards would constitute an unacceptablerisk to national security. CSR Article 31(2)’s requirementthat refugees ‘shall not’ be detained unless ‘necessary’appears among the chief casualties of such suspicions. US jurisprudenceremains strikingly devoid of reference to Article 31, and 2003’sMatter of D-J- is a prime example. D-J- was an administrativedecision in which the US Attorney General held that nationalsecurity required all US asylum seekers who successfully arrivevia boat must be subject to mandatory detention throughout thecourse of removal proceedings. Despite US accession to the Protocol,Article 31(2) was not mentioned. This article explores what might have happened to D-J- if theRefugee Convention had indeed been applied to his case. Utilizingthe international methodology for treaty interpretation, itapplies Article 31(2) to various aspects of the Attorney General'sdecision. Part 2 argues that under the Supreme Court's CharmingBetsy rule, statutory discretion to detain must be interpretedconsistently with US international obligations. Part 3 concludesthat Article 31(2) of the Refugee Convention grants asylum seekersa right to release whenever their detention is not ‘necessary’.Part 4 proposes a three-part ‘pyramid’ approachto explain the elemental phases of the decision to detain anasylum seeker and examines necessity at each stage. Finally,Part 5 discusses Article 31(2)’s implications regardingevidence and proportion. The premise throughout is that, hadit been applied, the Refugee Convention could have protectedthe interests of both D-J- and ‘national security’.