Verfijn uw zoekresultaat

Zoekresultaat: 417 artikelen

x
Artikel

The Imperfect International Sales Law

Time for a New Go or Better Keeping the Status Quo?

Tijdschrift Maandblad voor Vermogensrecht, Aflevering 9 2019
Trefwoorden CISG, imperfections of the current international sales law, reform, supplement, CISG 2.0
Auteurs Prof. mr. A.U. Janssen en N.G. Ahuja
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    A series of imperfections in the CISG touching upon various areas are laid out thereby prompting the question of whether the Convention ought to be reformed. Two possibilities, namely supplementing the CISG with additional hard law instruments and drafting a new convention, i.e. CISG 2.0 are discussed and evaluated.


Prof. mr. A.U. Janssen
Prof. mr. A.U. Janssen is a Professor of Civil Law and European Private Law at the Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

N.G. Ahuja
N.G. Ahuja is a Doctorate Candidate in Law at City University of Hong Kong.

    The author discusses the recent ECJ judgments in the cases Egenberger and IR on religious discrimination.


Andrzej Marian Świątkowski
Andrzej Marian Świątkowski, is a Jean Monet Professor of European Labour Law and Social Security, Jesuit University Ignatianum, Krakow, Poland and a member of the EELC Academic Board.
Article

Access_open Commercial Litigation in Europe in Transformation: The Case of the Netherlands Commercial Court

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden international business courts, Netherlands Commercial Court, choice of court, recognition and enforcements of judgements
Auteurs Eddy Bauw
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The judicial landscape in Europe for commercial litigation is changing rapidly. Many EU countries are establishing international business courts or have done so recently. Unmistakably, the approaching Brexit has had an effect on this development. In the last decades England and Wales – more precise, the Commercial Court in London - has built up a leading position as the most popular jurisdiction for resolving commercial disputes. The central question for the coming years will be what effect the new commercial courts in practice will have on the current dominance of English law and the leading position of the London court. In this article I address this question by focusing on the development of a new commercial court in the Netherlands: the Netherlands Commercial Court (NCC).


Eddy Bauw
Professor of Private Law and Administration of Justice at Molengraaff Institute for Private Law and Montaigne Centre for Rule of Law and Administration of Justice, Utrecht University. Substitute judge at the Court of Appeal of Arnhem-Leeuwarden and the Court of Appeal of The Hague.
Article

Access_open The Brussels International Business Court: Initial Overview and Analysis

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden international jurisdiction, English, court language, Belgium, business court
Auteurs Erik Peetermans en Philippe Lambrecht
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In establishing the Brussels International Business Court (BIBC), Belgium is following an international trend to attract international business disputes to English-speaking state courts. The BIBC will be an autonomous business court with the competence to settle, in English, disputes between companies throughout Belgium. This article focuses on the BIBC’s constitutionality, composition, competence, proceedings and funding, providing a brief analysis and critical assessment of each of these points. At the time of writing, the Belgian Federal Parliament has not yet definitively passed the Bill establishing the BIBC, meaning that amendments are still possible.


Erik Peetermans
Erik Peetermans is a legal adviser at the Federation of Enterprises in Belgium (FEB).

Philippe Lambrecht
Philippe Lambrecht is the Director-Secretary General at the Federation of Enterprises in Belgium (FEB).
Article

Access_open The Singapore International Commercial Court: The Future of Litigation?

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden international commercial court, Singapore, dispute resolution, litigation
Auteurs Man Yip
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The Singapore International Commercial Court (‘SICC’) was launched on 5 January 2015, at the Opening of Legal Year held at the Singapore Supreme Court. What prompted the creation of SICC? How is the SICC model of litigation different from litigation in the Singapore High Court? What is the SICC’s track record and what does it tell us about its future? This article seeks to answer these questions at greater depth than existing literature. Importantly, it examines these questions from the angle of reimagining access of justice for litigants embroiled in international commercial disputes. It argues that the SICC’s enduring contribution to improving access to justice is that it helps to change our frame of reference for international commercial litigation. Hybridisation, internationalisation, and party autonomy, the underpinning values of the SICC, are likely to be the values of the future of dispute resolution. International commercial dispute resolution frameworks – typically litigation frameworks – that unduly emphasise national boundaries and formalities need not and should not be the norm. Crucially, the SICC co-opts a refreshing public-private perspective to the resolution of international commercial disputes. It illuminates on the public interest element of the resolution of such disputes which have for some time fallen into the domain of international commercial arbitration; at the same time, it introduces greater scope for self-determination in international commercial litigation.


Man Yip
BCL (Oxon).
Article

Access_open Requirements upon Agreements in Favour of the NCC and the German Chambers – Clashing with the Brussels Ibis Regulation?

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden international commercial courts, the Netherlands Commercial Court (NCC), Chambers for International Commercial Disputes (Kammern für internationale Handelssachen), Brussels Ibis Regulation, choice of court agreements, formal requirements
Auteurs Georgia Antonopoulou
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In recent years, the Netherlands and Germany have added themselves to the ever-growing number of countries opting for the creation of an international commercial court. The Netherlands Commercial Court (NCC) and the German Chambers for International Commercial Disputes (Kammern für internationale Handelssachen, KfiH) will conduct proceedings entirely in English and follow their own, diverging rules of civil procedure. Aspiring to become the future venues of choice in international commercial disputes, the NCC law and the legislative proposal for the establishment of the KfiH allow parties to agree on their jurisdiction and entail detailed provisions regulating such agreements. In particular, the NCC requires the parties’ express and in writing agreement to litigate before it. In a similar vein, the KfiH legislative proposal requires in some instances an express and in writing agreement. Although such strict formal requirements are justified by the need to safeguard the procedural rights of weaker parties such as small enterprises and protect them from the peculiarities of the NCC and the KfiH, this article questions their compliance with the requirements upon choice of court agreements under Article 25 (1) Brussels Ibis Regulation. By qualifying agreements in favour of the NCC and the KfiH first as functional jurisdiction agreements and then as procedural or court language agreements this article concludes that the formal requirements set by the NCC law and the KfiH proposal undermine the effectiveness of the Brussels Ibis Regulation, complicate the establishment of these courts’ jurisdiction and may thus threaten their attractiveness as future litigation destinations.


Georgia Antonopoulou
PhD candidate at Erasmus School of Law, Rotterdam.
Article

Access_open Chambers for International Commercial Disputes in Germany: The State of Affairs

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden Justizinitiative Frankfurt, Law Made in Germany, International Commercial Disputes, Forum Selling, English Language Proceedings
Auteurs Burkhard Hess en Timon Boerner
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The prospect of attracting foreign commercial litigants to German courts in the wake of Brexit has led to a renaissance of English-language commercial litigation in Germany. Leading the way is the Frankfurt District Court, where – as part of the ‘Justizinitiative Frankfurt’ – a new specialised Chamber for International Commercial Disputes has been established. Frankfurt’s prominent position in the financial sector and its internationally oriented bar support this decision. Borrowing best practices from patent litigation and arbitration, the Chamber offers streamlined and litigant-focused proceedings, with English-language oral hearings, within the current legal framework of the German Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO).1xZivilprozessordnung (ZPO).
    However, to enable the complete litigation process – including the judgment – to proceed in English requires changes to the German Courts Constitution Act2xGerichtsverfassungsgesetz (GVG). (GVG). A legislative initiative in the Bundesrat aims to establish a suitable legal framework by abolishing the mandatory use of German as the language of proceedings. Whereas previous attempts at such comprehensive amendments achieved only limited success, support by several major federal states indicates that this time the proposal will succeed.
    With other English-language commercial court initiatives already established or planned in both other EU Member States and Germany, it is difficult to anticipate whether – and how soon – Frankfurt will succeed in attracting English-speaking foreign litigants. Finally, developments such as the 2018 Initiative for Expedited B2B Procedures of the European Parliament or the ELI–UNIDROIT project on Transnational Principles of Civil Procedure may also shape the long-term playing field.

Noten

  • 1 Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO).

  • 2 Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz (GVG).


Burkhard Hess
Burkhard Hess is the Executive Director of the Max Planck Institute Luxembourg for International, European and Regulatory Procedural Law (MPI Luxembourg).

Timon Boerner
Timon Boerner is a Research Fellow at the MPI Luxembourg.

Sir Geoffrey Vos
Chancellor of the High Court of England and Wales.
Article

Access_open Matchmaking International Commercial Courts and Lawyers’ Preferences in Europe

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden choice of court, commercial court, lawyers’ preferences, survey on lawyers, international court
Auteurs Erlis Themeli
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    France, Germany, Belgium, and the Netherlands have taken concrete steps to design and develop international commercial courts. Most of the projects claim to be building courts that match the preferences of court users. They also try to challenge England and Wales, which evidence suggests is the most attractive jurisdiction in the EU. For the success of these projects, it is important that their proposed courts corresponds with the expectations of the parties, but also manages to attract some of the litigants that go to London. This article argues that lawyers are the most important group of choice makers, and that their preferences are not sufficiently matched by the new courts. Lawyers have certain litigation service and court perception preferences. And while the new courts improve their litigation service, they do not sufficiently addressed these court perception preferences.


Erlis Themeli
Postdoc, Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus University Rotterdam.
Artikel

Access_open The Normative Framework of Labour Law

Tijdschrift Law and Method, september 2019
Trefwoorden labour law, normative framework, inequality, social justice
Auteurs Nuna Zekić
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article looks at how normative questions, i.e. ‘what should the law be?‘, are approached in modern labour law scholarship. A distinction is made between internal and external normative frameworks for analysis, whereby internal frameworks are made up of principles, values or standards that are part of the law and the external frameworks are made up of theories outside of law. As a functional legal field, labour law can also benefit to a great deal from empirical research. However, the article argues that empirical facts by themselves have a limited normative value and that we need a normative framework in order to answer normative and evaluative questions. Therefore, the aim of the article is to review, clarify and evaluate the internal normative framework of labour law.


Nuna Zekić
Associate Professor, Department of Labour Law and Social Policy, Tilburg University.
Pending Cases

Case C-17/19, Social Insurance

Bouygues travaux publics, Elco construct Bucarest, Welbond armatures, reference lodged by the Cour de cassation (France) on 10 January 2019

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 2 2019
Pending Cases

Case C-370/17, Social Insurance

Caisse de retraite du personnel navigant professionnel de l’aéronautique civile (CRPNPAC) – v – Vueling Airlines SA, reference lodged by the Tribunal de grande instance de Bobigny (France) on 19 June 2017

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 2 2019

    Following an appeal by Uber against the Employment Appeal Tribunal’s (EAT) finding last year, which was featured in EELC 2018/9, that drivers engaged by Uber are ‘workers’ rather than independent contractors (reported in EELC 2018-1), the Court of Appeal (CA) has now upheld the EAT’s decision. The CA also upheld the finding of the Employment Tribunal (ET), which was featured in EELC 2017/10, that drivers are working when they are signed into the Uber app and ready to work (reported in EECL 2017-1). Uber has approximately 40,000 drivers (and about 3.5 million users of its mobile phone application in London alone) and so this decision has potentially significant financial consequences for the company.


Jemma Thomas
Jemma Thomas is a Senior Associate Solicitor at Lewis Silkin LLP.
Artikel

Access_open Mobile Individualism: The Subjectivity of EU Citizenship

Tijdschrift Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden Individualism, EU Citizenship, Depoliticisation, Mobile Individualism, Citizenship and Form of Life
Auteurs Aristel Skrbic
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The central aim of this article is to analyse the manner in which the legal structure of EU citizenship subjectifies Union citizens. I begin by explicating Alexander Somek’s account of individualism as a concept which captures EU citizenship and propose to update his analysis by coining the notion of mobile individualism. By looking at a range of CJEU’s case law on EU citizenship through the lens of the purely internal rule and the transnational character of EU citizenship, I suggest that movement sits at the core of EU citizenship. In order to adequately capture this unique structure of citizenship, we need a concept of individualism which takes movement rather than depoliticisation as its central object of analysis. I propose that the notion of mobile individualism can best capture the subjectivity of a model EU citizen, a citizen who is a-political due to being mobile.


Aristel Skrbic
Aristel Skrbic is a PhD candidate and teaching and research assistant at the Institute of Philosophy at the KU Leuven.
Law Review

2019/1 EELC’s review of the year 2018

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 1 2019
Auteurs Ruben Houweling, Catherine Barnard, Filip Dorssemont e.a.
Samenvatting

    For the second time, various of our academic board analysed employment law cases from last year. However, first, we start with some general remarks.


Ruben Houweling

Catherine Barnard

Filip Dorssemont

Jean-Philippe Lhernould

Francesca Maffei

Niklas Bruun

Anthony Kerr

Jan-Pieter Vos

Luca Ratti

Daiva Petrylaite

Andrej Poruban

Stein Evju
Over de grens

Het Engelse Supreme Court over het wijzigingsbeding in commerciële contracten

Tijdschrift Contracteren, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden No oral modification clause, Wijzigingsbeding, Engelse Supreme Court, Commercieel contractenrecht
Auteurs Prof. mr. H.N. Schelhaas
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Medio 2018 deed het Engelse Supreme Court een belangrijke uitspraak over de afdwingbaarheid van een no oral modification clause. In dit artikel wordt deze uitspraak besproken en geconfronteerd met het Nederlandse recht op dit punt.


Prof. mr. H.N. Schelhaas
Prof. mr. H.N. Schelhaas is hoogleraar Privaatrecht aan de Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.

    This article examines the hearing of children in Belgian and Dutch courts in return proceedings following an international child abduction. The analysis is based on the experience, insights and needs of both children who have experienced an abduction by one of their parents, and family judges. In this sensitive and often highly conflicted family context, hearing children in court is not self-evident. Challenges of both a judicial-institutional and communicative-relational nature can hinder the effective implementation of children’s right to be heard. This contribution seeks to answer the question of how to better support judges and children in addressing these challenges, with the aim of enabling children to fully and effectively participate in return procedures. Building on the interviews with children and judges, supplemented with findings from Belgian and Dutch case law and international literature, three key recommendations are formulated: 1) explore and evaluate opportunities for judges and children to experience support during the return procedure, for example via the figure of the guardian ad litem; 2) invest in training and opportunities for specialisation of judges with a view to strengthen their expertise in taking the best interests of the child into account; and 3) systematically pay attention to feedback to the children involved on how the final decision about their return is made – and this before, during and after the procedure.
    ---
    Dit artikel bestudeert het horen van kinderen in Belgische en Nederlandse rechtbanken in terugkeerprocedures volgend op een internationale kinderontvoering. De analyse vertrekt vanuit de beleving, ervaring, inzichten, noden en behoeften van zowel kinderen als van bevoegde familierechters. In deze gevoelige en vaak uiterst conflictueuze gezinscontext is het horen van kinderen door de rechter geen evidentie. Uitdagingen van zowel juridisch-institutionele als communicatieve-relationele aard kunnen een effectieve implementatie van het recht van kinderen om gehoord te worden in de weg staan. Dit artikel zoekt een antwoord op de vraag hoe rechters en kinderen beter kunnen worden ondersteund om deze uitdagingen aan te pakken, met als doel dat kinderen volwaardig kunnen participeren in de terugkeerprocedure. Voortbouwend op de interviews met kinderen en rechters, aangevuld met bevindingen uit Belgische en Nederlandse rechtspraak en internationale literatuur, worden drie sleutelaanbevelingen geformuleerd: 1) voorzie mogelijkheden voor rechters en kinderen om spanningsvelden weg te werken tijdens de terugkeerprocedure, bijvoorbeeld via de ondersteunende figuur van de bijzonder curator; 2) investeer in opleiding en groeiende specialisatiemogelijkheden bij rechters en 3) heb aandacht voor feedback en terugkoppeling naar de betrokken kinderen over hoe de eindbeslissing over hun terugkeer tot stand komt, en dit zowel voor, tijdens als na de procedure.


Sara Lembrechts LLM
Sara Lembrechts is researcher at University of Antwerp (Law and Development Research Group) and policy advisor at Children’s Rights Knowledge Centre (KeKi).

Marieke Putters LLM
Marieke Putters is researcher at the International Child Abduction Center (Centrum IKO).

Kim Van Hoorde
Kim Van Hoorde is Project & Prevention Manager at Child Focus.

dr. Thalia Kruger
Thalia Kruger, PhD, is Associate Professor at the University of Antwerp (Personal Rights and Property Rights Research Group) and Honorary Research Associate, University of Cape Town.

dr. Koen Ponnet
Koen Ponnet, PhD, is Professor at Imec-Mict-Ghent University (Faculty of Social Sciences).

dr. Wouter Vandenhole
Wouter Vandenhole, PhD, is Professor at the University of Antwerp (Law and Development Research Group).
Article

Access_open A changing paradigm of protection of vulnerable adults and its implications for the Netherlands

Tijdschrift Family & Law, februari 2019
Auteurs H.N. Stelma-Roorda LLM MSc, dr. C. Blankman en prof. dr. M.V. Antokolskaia
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The perception of how the interests of vulnerable adults should be protected has been changing over time. Under the influence of human and patient’s rights a profound shift of protection paradigms has taken place in the last decades. In the framework of this shift, in addition to traditional adult guardianship measures, new instruments have been developed allowing adults to play a greater role in the protection of their (future) interests. This has also been the case in the Netherlands, where adults in the course of the last decade have acquired the possibility to make a so-called living will, internationally better known as a continuing, enduring or lasting power of attorney. This article discusses this instrument, in comparison with the traditional adult guardianship measures currently in force in the Netherlands, from the perspective of the new protection paradigm based on a human rights approach.
    ---
    In de afgelopen decennia is de manier waarop naar de bescherming van kwetsbare meerderjarigen wordt gekeken, veranderd. Van een benadering waarbij de focus voornamelijk lag op bescherming is de nadruk steeds meer komen te liggen op het recht op autonomie en zelfbeschikking van de meerderjarige. De opkomst van mensen- en patiëntenrechten heeft geleid tot het ontstaan van een nieuw beschermingsparadigma. In dat kader zijn nieuwe instrumenten ontwikkeld, die meerderjarigen een grotere rol toekennen in de bescherming van hun (toekomstige) belangen. Dit is eveneens het geval in Nederland, waar meerderjarigen een levenstestament kunnen opstellen om voorzieningen te treffen voor een toekomstige periode van wilsonbekwaamheid. Dit artikel bespreekt het levenstestament, in samenhang met de traditionele rechterlijke beschermingsmaatregelen, vanuit het perspectief van het nieuwe beschermingsparadigma.


H.N. Stelma-Roorda LLM MSc
Rieneke Stelma-Roorda is PhD candidate at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

dr. C. Blankman
Kees Blankman is associate professor at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

prof. dr. M.V. Antokolskaia
Masha Antokolskaia is professor of family law at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Artikel

Access_open Legal big data en wet- en regelgeving: perspectieven en uitdagingen

Tijdschrift RegelMaat, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden big data, AI, wet- en regelgeving, uitdagingen en zorgen
Auteurs dr. F.L. Leeuw
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    De idee dat big data voor het recht en de rechtswetenschap belangrijk zijn is niet nieuw en is in dit artikel toegespitst op het ontwikkelen, implementeren en evalueren van wet- en regelgeving. Na een inleiding over het niet vanzelfsprekend zijn van de aandacht voor big data van juristen (zie Susskinds disruptieve technologieën-vergelijking), worden verschillende (potentiële) bijdragen van big data voor het ontwikkelen van wet- en regelgeving geschetst, waarbij ook personalized legislation aan de orde komt. Bij het implementeren van wetgeving wordt o.a. ingegaan op legal logistics. Vervolgens wordt het evalueren van wet- en regelgeving geïllustreerd met voorbeelden. Aansluitend komt de vraag aan de orde hoe big data het wetgeven kan veranderen en wat dat betekent voor wetgevers en welke uitdagingen en zorgen daarmee samenhangen.


dr. F.L. Leeuw
Professor dr. F.L. (Frans) Leeuw is hoogleraar Recht, Openbaar Bestuur en Sociaal-Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek, Maastricht University. Eerder: Directeur WODC; Decaan Humanities, Open Universiteit; Hoofdinspecteur Onderwijsinspectie, Directeur Algemene Rekenkamer en bijzonder Hoogleraar evaluatieonderzoek Universiteit Utrecht.
Objets trouvés

Recht is niet alleen recht als er recht op staat

Over het (h)erkennen van de rechtskracht van private normen

Tijdschrift RegelMaat, Aflevering 6 2018
Trefwoorden normalisatie, meetinstructie, prejudiciële vragen, status en rechtsgevolgen
Auteurs Prof. dr. R.A.J. van Gestel
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Met het Achmea/Rijnberg-arrest van de Hoge Raad leek een doorbraak te zijn bereikt inzake de doorwerking van private regelgeving in het recht. Wanneer partijen het onderling eens zijn over de toepasselijkheid van bijvoorbeeld gedragscodes, toetst de Hoge Raad er ook aan zonder de juridische status ervan te beoordelen. De vraag wat te doen wanneer de relevantie van private regelgeving tussen partijen wordt betwist, blijkt echter een veel lastiger te nemen hobbel. Recente jurisprudentie over normalisatienormen toont aan dat het in zo’n geval buitengewoon complex is om te bepalen welke rechtsgevolgen aan private regels moeten worden verbonden. Wettelijke (h)erkenningsregels die de rechter behulpzaam kunnen zijn bij het kwalificeren en waarderen van private regels worden in die situatie node gemist. Hier ligt ook een taak voor wetgevingsjuristen. De vraag is alleen of één algemeen wettelijk kader voor uiteenlopende vormen van private regelgeving momenteel al haalbaar is. Werken met experimenteerbepalingen zou wel eens vruchtbaarder kunnen blijken te zijn. Dergelijke bepalingen zullen alleen werken wanneer wetgevingsjuristen, die ze moeten opstellen, zich eerst verdiepen in de schaduwwereld van private normen waarop deze bijdrage enig licht probeert te werpen.


Prof. dr. R.A.J. van Gestel
Prof. dr. R.A.J. (Rob) van Gestel is hoogleraar Regulering en Juridische methoden en technieken aan de Tilburg Law School.
Toont 81 - 100 van 417 gevonden teksten
1 2 3 5 7 8 9 20 21
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment twee filters: rubriek en jaar.