Zoekresultaat: 142 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.

    This was a case alleging detrimental treatment for whistleblowing brought by an employee working outside the UK against two co-workers also working abroad in the same location. The Court of Appeal (CA) ruled that there was no jurisdiction for the Employment Tribunal (ET) to hear the claim in relation to personal liability of the co-workers because they were outside the scope of UK employment law. The CA’s judgment potentially has implications for other types of claim brought by UK employees posted abroad where similar personal liability provisions apply, such as discrimination and harassment.


Richard Lister
Richard Lister is a Managing Practice Development Lawyer at Lewis Silkin LLP.

    The Luxembourg Court of Appeal (Cour d’appel de Luxembourg) confirmed that an employee dismissed with notice and exempted from performing their work during the notice period is no longer bound by the non-competition duties arising from their loyalty obligation and can therefore engage in an employment contract with a direct competitor of their former employer during that exempted notice period. However, the Court of Appeal decided that, even if the former employee is in principle entitled to use the know-how and knowledge they acquired with their former employer, the poaching of clients during the notice period must, due to the facts and circumstances and in the light of the rules applicable in the financial sector, be considered as an unfair competition act and therefore constitutes serious misconduct justifying the termination of the employment contract with immediate effect.


Michel Molitor
Michel Molitor is the managing partner of MOLITOR Avocats à la Cour SARL in Luxembourg, www.molitorlegal.lu.

Régis Muller
Régis Muller is partner within the Employment, Pension & Immigration department of MOLITOR Avocats à la Cour SARL in Luxembourg, www.molitorlegal.lu.
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 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 Joinder of Non-Consenting Parties: The Singapore International Commercial Court Approach Meets Transnational Recognition and Enforcement

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden international commercial courts, international business courts, third parties, third party joinder, recognition and enforcement
Auteurs Drossos Stamboulakis en Blake Crook
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this article we explore the approach of the Singapore International Commercial Court (the ‘SICC’) to jurisdiction and joinder of non-consenting parties, and way that any resulting judgments are likely to be treated by foreign enforcing courts. This novel juncture arises as international commercial courts, such as the SICC, rely predominantly upon party autonomy to enliven their jurisdiction over disputants. This does not require any territorial link of the parties or the dispute to the host jurisdiction (Singapore). At the same time, however, the SICC is granted a mandate under Singaporean law to join non-consenting parties, again with no necessary territorial link. Where such joinder occurs, any resulting judgment is likely to face significant difficulties if recognition and enforcement is sought outside of Singapore. To support this argument, we first set out the ways in which non-consenting disputants may be joined to proceedings before the SICC, and offer some initial thoughts on how these powers are likely to be exercised. Second, we argue that any such exercise of jurisdiction – that lacks either territorial or consent-based jurisdiction grounds – is unlikely to gain support internationally, by reference to transnational recognition and enforcement approaches, and the SICC’s most likely recognition and enforcement destinations. Finally, we offer some concluding remarks about the utility of international commercial court proceedings against non-consenting parties, including the possibility they may impact on domestic recognition and enforcement approaches in foreign States.


Drossos Stamboulakis
B.Com, LLB (Hons) (Monash); LLM (EMLE); Law Lecturer, USC School of Law (University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia)

Blake Crook
PhD Candidate, Faculty of Law (University of Melbourne, Australia), B.Com (Acc), LLB (Hons) (Sunshine Coast).
Artikel

Access_open Control of Relative Market Power in Competition Law

An Instrument to Implement the Unfair Trading Practices Directive?

Tijdschrift Markt & Mededinging, Aflevering 4 2019
Auteurs Jochen Glöckner
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    On April 2019 the Directive on Unfair Trading Practices in business-to-business relationships in the agricultural and food supply chain has entered into force. In particular the remedies that the Member States are supposed to offer seem to be designed after the blueprint of competition law enforcement, and the practices deemed “unfair” in this Directive are closely related to abusive practices under Article 102 TFEU. While such practices are typically based on an economic dependence, no dominant position as required by Article 102 TFEU will be found. So, the question is whether an expansion of the scope of control of unilateral conduct under competition law might be the way to implement the Directive.
    Germany has a long-standing tradition with respect to the expansion of the scope of control of abusive conduct to undertakings with less than a dominant position. Following a brief introduction that outlines the contents of the Directive (I.) this contribution is going to give a picture of the provisions on control of so-called “relative market power”, i.e. a position of independence not versus all competitors and the opposite market side as defined by the ECJ, but only in the relation to individual trading partners under German competition law (II.), and finish with an outline of the structural problems that might stand in the way of implementing the new rules with a simple application or amendment of the competition law provisions on relative market power (III.)


Jochen Glöckner
Prof. Dr. iur., J. Glöckner LL.M. (USA), Chair for German and European Private and Economic Law, Universität Konstanz; Judge at the Higher Regional Court Karlsruhe.

    In 2016 the Dutch Government Commission of Reassessment of Parenthood (GCRP) proposed a wide array of legal changes to Family Law, e.g. with regard to legal multi-parenthood and legal multiple parental responsibility. Although the commission researched these matters thoroughly in its quest towards proposing new directions in the field of Family Law, multi-parents themselves were not interviewed by the commission. Therefore, this article aims to explore a possible gap between the social experiences of parents and the recommendations of the GCRP. Data was drawn from in depth-interviews with a sample of 25 parents in plus-two-parent constellations living in Belgium and the Netherlands. For the most part the social experiences of parents aligned with the ways in which the GCRP plans to legally accommodate the former. However, my data tentatively suggests that other (legal) recommendations of the GCRP need to be explored more in depth.
    ---
    In 2016 stelde de Nederlandse Staatscommissie Herijking ouderschap voor om een wettelijk kader te creëren voor meerouderschap en meeroudergezag. Ondanks de grondigheid van het gevoerde onderzoek ontbraken er gegevens omtrent de ervaringen van de meerouders zelf. Dit artikel levert een bijdrage in het vullen van deze leemte door inzage te geven in de (juridische) ervaringen van 25 ouders in meerouderschapsconstellaties in België en Nederland.


Nola Cammu MA
Nola Cammu is PhD Candidate at the Law Faculty of the University of Antwerp.
Artikel

Access_open Succession Mediation in Europe

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 1 2019
Trefwoorden succession mediation, cross-border mediation, Research, Mediation Directive, Succession Regulation
Auteurs Judith Pfützenreuter
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The two years FOMENTO project ‘Fostering Mediation in cross-border civil and succession matters’ aims to contribute to conflict prevention in cross-border succession matters. To reach a deeper understanding and impulses for a correct implementation of Directive 2008/52/EC (Mediation Directive) and of Regulation (EU) No. 650/2012 (Succession Regulation) the effects of both regulations have been analyzed in a research study. To this end, country reports about the implementation of the Succession Regulation and the Mediation Directive in six European countries (Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Poland and Sweden) have been assembled and 105 expert interviews with lawyers, notaries, judges and mediators have been conducted and analyzed.
    This article gives a general overview about the outcomes of the research study and focuses on the analysis of the expert interviews. The experts gave answers about the concrete advantages, challenges and suggestions for improving mediation in cross-border succession conflicts and the effects of the European Succession Regulation.


Judith Pfützenreuter
Judith Pfützenreuter is Member of EU-Project FOMENTO (Fostering mediation in cross-border civil and succession matters).
Artikel

Bestuurdersaansprakelijkheid en internetcriminaliteit in de bioscoop: een spannende film?

Rb. Amsterdam (kanton) 31 oktober 2018, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2018:7881 (CEO-fraude Pathé)

Tijdschrift Maandblad voor Ondernemingsrecht, Aflevering 3-4 2019
Trefwoorden bestuurdersaansprakelijkheid, werknemersaansprakelijkheid, opzet of bewuste roekeloosheid, ernstig verwijt
Auteurs Mr. dr. W.A. Westenbroek
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In deze praktisch-wetenschappelijke bijdrage wordt aan de hand van de CEO-fraude bij Pathé stilgestaan bij het onderscheid tussen de aansprakelijkheidspositie van de bestuurder en de aansprakelijkheidspositie van de werknemer en de in dat verband gehanteerde terminologie.


Mr. dr. W.A. Westenbroek
Mr. dr. W.A. Westenbroek is advocaat bij WestLegal te Amsterdam en verbonden aan de Erasmus School of Law.

    Alternative/amicable dispute resolution (ADR) is omnipresent these days. In line with global evolutions, the Belgian legislator embraced the use of these ADR mechanisms. Recent reforms of the law, first in 2013 with the act concerning the introduction of a Family and Juvenile Court and consecutively in 2018 with the act containing diverse provisions regarding civil law with a view to the promotion of alternative forms of conflict resolution, implemented more far-reaching measures to promote ADR than ever before. The ultimate goal seems to alter our society’s way of conflict resolution and make the court the ultimum remedium in case all other options failed.In that respect, the legislator took multiple initiatives to stimulate amicable dispute resolution. The reform of 2013 focused solely on family cases, the one in 2018 was broader and designed for all civil cases. The legal tools consist firstly of an information provision regarding ADR for the family judge’s clerk, lawyers and bailiffs. The judges can hear parties about prior initiatives they took to resolve their conflict amicably and assess whether amicable solutions can still be considered, as well as explain these types of solutions and adjourn the case for a short period to investigate the possibilities of amicable conflict resolution. A legal framework has been created for a new method, namely collaborative law and the law also regulates the link between a judicial procedure and the methods of mediation and collaborative law to facilitate the transition between these procedures. Finally, within the Family Courts, specific ‘Chambers of Amicable Settlement’ were created, which framework is investigated more closely in this article. All of these legal tools are further discussed and assessed on their strengths and weaknesses.
    ---
    Alternatieve of minnelijke conflictoplossing is alomtegenwoordig. De Belgische wetgever heeft het gebruik van deze minnelijke oplossingsmethodes omarmd, in navolging van wereldwijde evoluties. Recente wetshervormingen implementeerden maatregelen ter promotie van minnelijke conflictoplossing die verder reiken dan ooit tevoren. Het betreft vooreerst de hervorming in 2013 met de wet betreffende de invoering van een familie- en jeugdrechtbank en vervolgens kwam er in 2018 de wet houdende diverse bepalingen inzake burgerlijk recht en bepalingen met het oog op de bevordering van alternatieve vormen van geschillenoplossing. De ultieme doelstelling van deze hervormingen is een mentaliteitswijziging omtrent onze wijze van conflictoplossing teweegbrengen, waarbij de rechtbank het ultimum remedium dient te worden nadat alle overige opties faalden.De wetshervorming van 2013 focuste uitsluitend op familiale materies, de hervorming van 2018 was ruimer en had alle burgerlijke zaken voor ogen. De wettelijke mogelijkheden bestaan vooreerst uit een informatieverstrekking omtrent minnelijke conflictoplossing in hoofde van de griffier van de familierechtbank, advocaten en gerechtsdeurwaarders. Rechters kunnen partijen horen omtrent eerdere ondernomen initiatieven om hun conflict op een minnelijke manier op te lossen, zij beoordelen of minnelijke oplossingen alsnog kunnen worden overwogen, zij kunnen de diverse minnelijke mogelijkheden toelichten aan partijen alsook de zaak voor een korte periode uitstellen om partijen toe te laten de mogelijkheden aan minnelijke conflictoplossing te verkennen. Er werd voorts een wetgevend kader uitgewerkt voor een nieuwe oplossingsmethode, namelijk de collaboratieve onderhandeling. De wet creëert tevens een link tussen een gerechtelijke procedure en de methodes van bemiddeling en collaboratieve onderhandeling, om de overgang tussen deze procedures te vereenvoudigen. Tot slot werden er binnen de familierechtbanken specifieke kamers voor minnelijke schikking opgericht, waarvan het wetgevend kader in detail wordt bestudeerd in dit artikel. Al deze wettelijke opties worden nader besproken en beoordeeld aan de hand van hun sterktes en zwaktes.


Sofie Raes
Sofie Raes is a Ph.D. candidate at the Institute for Family Law of the University of Ghent, where she researches alternative dispute resolution, with a focus on the chambers of amicable settlement in Family Courts. She is also an accredited mediator in family cases.
Over de grens

Minder ruimte voor hypothetische ‘onderhandelingsschadevergoeding’ bij schadevergoeding na ‘breach of contract’ in het Verenigd Koninkrijk

Morris-Garner and another (Appellants)/One Step (Support) Ltd (Respondent) [2018] UKSC 20

Tijdschrift Contracteren, Aflevering 4 2018
Trefwoorden schadevergoeding, wanprestatie, schadevaststelling, Engels recht, ‘breach of contract’
Auteurs Mr. drs. M. van Kogelenberg
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie


Mr. drs. M. van Kogelenberg
Mr. drs. M. van Kogelenberg is universitair docent privaatrecht aan het Molengraaff Instituut voor Privaatrecht en onderzoeker bij het Utrecht Centre for Accountability and Liability (UCALL).
Mededinging

Gun jumping en de EU-Concentratieverordening: wanneer is sprake van een valse start?

Tijdschrift Nederlands tijdschrift voor Europees recht, Aflevering 7-8 2018
Trefwoorden concentratiecontrole, gun jumping, voortijdige totstandbrenging, standstill-verplichting
Auteurs Mr. dr. J.C.A. Houdijk en Mr. R.M.T.M. Jaspers
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In deze zaak geeft het Hof van Justitie antwoord op de vraag welke criteria gelden om te bepalen of sprake is van een totstandbrengingshandeling in het kader van het EU-concentratiecontroleregime. Het Hof van Justitie geeft hiermee een verdere uitleg van de standstill-verplichting ex artikel 7 lid 1 EU-Concentratieverordening. De uitspraak bevat voorts criteria om de risico’s omtrent gun jumping in de praktijk beter te kunnen inschatten.
    HvJ 31 mei 2018, zaak C-633/16, Ernst & Young P/S/Konkurrenceradet, ECLI:EU:C:2018:371.


Mr. dr. J.C.A. Houdijk
Mr. dr. J.C.A. (Joost) Houdijk is advocaat bij AKD.

Mr. R.M.T.M. Jaspers
Mr. R.M.T.M. (Robbert) Jaspers is advocaat bij AKD.

    On 20 December 2018, the Commission of UNCITRAL adopted the Model Law on International Commercial Mediation and International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation, 2018 (amending the Uncitral Model Law on International Commercial Conciliation, 2002). On 20 December 2018 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the ‘United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation’. Herman Verbist provides an overview of the Convention and the amended Model Law. This contribution ends with the complete Convention in Annex.


Herman Verbist
Herman Verbist is attorney at the Ghent and Brussels Bar, in Belgium (Everest Attorneys) and accredited mediator in civil and commercial matters by the Federal Mediation Commission in Belgium. He attends, since many years, the sessions of UNCITRAL Working Group II ‘Dispute Settlement’ (previously named ‘Arbitration and Conciliation’) as a member of the delegation of FICA (Forum for International Conciliation and Arbitration); he is also a Managing Director of FICA.
Artikel

UNCITRAL and a New International Legislative Framework on Mediation

Tijdschrift Nederlands-Vlaams tijdschrift voor mediation en conflictmanagement, Aflevering 4 2018
Trefwoorden Solving disputes, United Nations, Trade law, Uncitral
Auteurs Judith Knieper en Corinne Montineri
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    More than sixty years after the adoption of the New York Convention, UNCITRAL finalised at its annual session, in July 2018, an instrument akin to the New York Convention in the area of mediation: the United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation (‘the Singapore Convention on Mediation’ or ‘the Convention’), which was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 20 December 2018. In addition, UNCITRAL adopted the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Mediation and International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation, (2018, amending the Model Law on International Commercial Conciliation (2002); ‘the revised Model Law’).
    This contribution gives an overview of these two texts and their drafting process, starting with an overview of the works done by UNCITRAL over the past decades in the field of international mediation.


Judith Knieper
Judith Knieper is legal officer at the International Trade Law Division of the United Nations Office of Legal Affairs, which also serves as the Secretariat of UNCITRAL.

Corinne Montineri
Corinne Montineri is legal officer at the International Trade Law Division of the United Nations Office of Legal Affairs, which also serves as the Secretariat of UNCITRAL. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Organization.
Article

Access_open Personal Data, Algorithms and Profiling in the EU: Overcoming the Binary Notion of Personal Data through Quantum Mechanics

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 3 2018
Trefwoorden data protection, GDPR, bigdata, algorithm, quantum mechanics
Auteurs Alessandro El Khoury
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this paper I propose to analyse the binary notion of personal data and highlight its limits, in order to propose a different conception of personal data. From a risk regulation perspective, the binary notion of personal data is not particularly fit for purpose, considering that data collection and information flows are tremendously big and complex. As a result, the use of a binary system to determine the applicability of EU data protection law may be a simplistic approach. In an effort of bringing physics and law together, certain principles elaborated within the quantum theory are surprisingly applicable to data protection law, and can be used as guidance to shed light on many of today’s data complexities. Lastly, I will discuss the implications and the effects that certain processing operations may have on the possibility of qualifying certain data as personal. In other terms, how the chances to identify certain data as personal is dependent upon the processing operations that a data controller might put in place.


Alessandro El Khoury
Alessandro El Khoury, LLM, Legal and Policy Officer, DG Health & Food Safety, European Commission.

Joost Maassen
Joost Maassen is a Negotiation & Conflict Management Professional with Dialogue B.V. in The Netherlands. Specialist for negotiations and alternative dispute resolution (mediation) in (international) commercial, corporate and employment matters. Worked in (international) corporate and commercial litigation and arbitration as an attorney with a leading Dutch law firm, De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek.
ECtHR Court Watch

ECtHR 27 February 2018, application no. 1085/10, Unfair dismissal, Freedom of expression

Guja – v – The Republic of Moldova (No. 2), Moldavian case

Tijdschrift European Employment Law Cases, Aflevering 1 2018
Trefwoorden Unfair dismissal, Freedom of expression
Samenvatting

    Dismissal after re-instatement of employment following an ECtHR judgment found an infringement of freedom of speech.

Artikel

Letter of Intent in International Contracting

Bespreking van het proefschrift van mr. E. Pannebakker

Tijdschrift Maandblad voor Vermogensrecht, Aflevering 1 2018
Trefwoorden commerciële contracten, letter of intent, precontractuele goede trouw, onderhandelen
Auteurs Mr. dr. A.G.F. Ancery
Samenvatting

    In deze bijdrage wordt het proefschrift van Pannebakker besproken, dat ziet op het uitonderhandelen van overeenkomsten in een internationale commerciële setting en de rol die een letter of intent daarbinnen kan spelen.


Mr. dr. A.G.F. Ancery
Article

Access_open The Peer Review Process of the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes

A Critical Assessment on Authority and Legitimacy

Tijdschrift Erasmus Law Review, Aflevering 2 2017
Trefwoorden Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information, exercise of regulatory authority, due process requirements, peer review reports, legitimacy
Auteurs Leo E.C. Neve
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The Global Forum on transparency and exchange of information for tax purposes has undertaken peer reviews on the implementation of the global standard of exchange of information on request, both from the perspective of formalities available and from the perspective of actual implementation. In the review reports Global Forum advises jurisdictions on required amendments of regulations and practices. With these advices, the Global Forum exercises regulatory authority. The article assesses the legitimacy of the exercise of such authority by the Global Forum and concludes that the exercise of such authority is not legitimate for the reason that the rule of law is abused by preventing jurisdictions to adhere to due process rules.


Leo E.C. Neve
Leo Neve is a doctoral student at the Erasmus School of Law, Rotterdam.
Toont 1 - 20 van 142 gevonden teksten
« 1 3 4 5 6 7 8
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.