Páginas

quarta-feira, 20 de março de 2019

Two Conferences in Brazil

by RALF MICHAELS on MARCH 1, 2019

Two conferences on private international law have been announced for Brazil. From March 13-16, the University of Brasilia will organize a conference on the topic of “Challenges to Private International Law in contemporary society”. Prior to that, I will teach a graduate mini-course on comparative law and private international law on March 11-13.

And then, on May 15-17, the 3rd international law conference RIBAMAR at the Universidade Estadual do Maranhão will discuss “Emerging Topics in Private International Law.” The program is here, instructions for signing up here.

Exciting to see that the energy is sustained n Brazil, after the JPIL conference in 2017 in Rio de Janeiro.

Copiado de: Conflict of Laws.net. Disponível em: <http://conflictoflaws.net/2019/two-conferences-in-brazil/>. Acesso em: 16 mar. 2019.

segunda-feira, 18 de março de 2019

Guide on the Law Applicable to International Commercial Contracts in the Americas has been approved by OAS

by MAYELA CELIS on MARCH 15, 2019

The Organization of American States (OAS) has announced that the Inter-American Juridical Committee (CJI) has approved the Guide on the Law Applicable to International Commercial Contracts in the Americas. See the summarized recommendations on p. 6, the actual Guide starts on p. 16.

The Rapporteur of the Guide is Dr José Antonio Moreno Rodríguez.

Importantly, one of the recommendations of the Guide is that “OAS Member States, regardless of whether they have or have not ratified, or do or do not intend to ratify the Mexico Convention, are encouraged to consider its solutions for their own domestic legislation, whether by material incorporation, incorporation by reference, or other mechanisms as applicable to their own domestic legal regimes, taking into consideration subsequent developments in the law applicable to international commercial contracts as expressed in the Hague Principles and as described in this Guide.”

Unfortunately, only two States are parties to the Mexico Convention: Mexico and Venezuela.

While the OAS Guide takes into consideration and examines both instruments, it should be noted that the official article-by-article Commentary on the Hague Principles is available here.

The OAS news item is available here (Spanish version of the Guide is not yet available).


segunda-feira, 11 de março de 2019

The Circulation of Judgments Under the Draft Hague Judgments Convention

U. of Pittsburgh Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2019-02
36 Pages - Posted: 15 Feb 2019
Ronald A. Brand
University of Pittsburgh - School of Law
Date Written: February 14, 2019

Abstract
The 2018 draft of a Hague Judgments Convention adopts a framework based largely on what some have referred to as “jurisdictional filters.” Article 5(1) provides a list of thirteen authorized bases of indirect jurisdiction by which a foreign judgment is first tested. If one of these jurisdictional filters is satisfied, the resulting judgment is presumptively entitled to circulate under the convention, subject to a set of grounds for non-recognition that generally are consistent with existing practice in most legal systems. This basic architecture of the Convention has been assumed to be set from the start of the Special Commission process, and will be key to the Convention’s acceptability to countries which might ratify or accede to any final Convention. An alternative approach to convention architecture, which would allow the test for judgment circulation to be built on as few as four rules, was considered and passed over in the earlier Working Group which preceded the Special Commission process. This article discusses the advantages and disadvantages of each of the 2018 draft Convention text as well as the alternative approach. It then suggests that, no matter which approach one considers to be better, the 2019 Diplomatic Conference should begin with an awareness of both options, and an understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of each, and move forward with a clear decision that the option chosen is the best alternative. Such consideration may (1) lead to the conclusion that the choices already made are the best for a multilateral treaty; (2) result in a determination that an alternative approach is a better option; or (3) demonstrate that one approach works best for some legal systems while another approach works best for other legal systems–leading to dual texts that could form the bases for differing bilateral and multilateral treaty relationships across the globe, while still improving the global framework for the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments.

Referência:
Brand, Ronald A. The Circulation of Judgments Under the Draft Hague Judgments Convention (February 14, 2019). Un. of Pittsburgh Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2019-02. Disponível em: . Acesso em: 05 mar. 2019.