The dynamics of the relationship between Article 31, paragraph 2 of the Brussels Regulation and Articles 5 and 6 of the Hague Convention are illustrated in the article (pages 405-408). In a case where the Hague Convention should apply instead of the Brussels Regulation, because one of the parties resides in a non-EU member state, while the elected jurisdiction is located in an EU Member State (see Article 26, paragraph 6, point a) of the Hague Convention), Article 6 of the Convention is expected to be applied by an unelected EU court. However, the fundamental nature of the mechanism covered by Article 31, paragraph 2 of the Brussels Regulation may justify the continuation of another line of analysis. (See case C-452/12 Nipponkoa Insurance Co (Europe) Ltd v Interzuid Transport BV EU:C:2013:858, [2014] I.L.Pr 10, [36]; See also for similar effect, case C-533/08 TNT Express Nederland BV against AXA Versicherung AG EU:C:2010:243, [2010] I.L.Pr. 35, [49]It is argued that the interpretive approach of the Hartley-Dogauchi report has much to be commensurate, as it follows the path of least resistance, presenting the right to pursue in an unelected forum as an exception and not as a narrow standard. The exceptional nature of the right to take legal action in the unelected forum under the Hague Convention may be brought into line with Article 31, paragraph 2, of the Brussels Regulation. This usually leads to the suspension of proceedings before the unelected court as soon as the elected court is seized. Consequently, the frequency of parallel procedures and incompatible judgments, which are in themselves important objectives under the Brussels Regulation. It is to be hoped that the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice on the emergence of the Hague Convention and the Brussels Regulation will provide definitive and relevant answers to the issues discussed in this article. “The book is indispensable for anyone who wants to know how the choice of judicial agreements is now dealt with in law and will be dealt with after January 10, 2015.

This is not just an excellent book in the pragmatic tradition of the British private law scholarship… But it is also a point of reference that other authors cannot ignore in this area. ” – Paul R Beaumont and Katarina Trimmings, The Edinburgh Law Review Introduction 1:Introduction What instrument? 2:Territorial application 3:From when do the instruments apply? 4:Subject 5:International Application Field 6:Conflict of Instruments Validity and Effect 7:Validity of Court Decisions 8:Impact of Court Decisions 9:Recognition and Execution of Judgments 10:Recourses and Procedures 11:Intermediate Procedures Special Topics 12:Insurance 13:Contracts with consumers in Brussels and Lugano 14:Individual employment contracts to Brussels and Lugano 15:Still property 16:Society 17:The Brussels Intellectual Property Commissions, the Brussels-1 Regulation and the Lugano Convention are stealthy judicial provisions of the Brussels Convention, Brussels 2000 Brussels 2012, the Lugano Convention of 1988 and the Lugano Convention of 2007 Brussels 2012: text of the Hague Regulation: text of the Convention and Hartley/Dogauchi report Excerpts from the Nygh/Pocar report This is the first text to deal with all the instruments that govern judicial decisions in Europe and which have a practical debate on their mutual relations. The existing common law, which has so long dominated the debate on this subject, will be important with the wider application of European and international instruments. The resulting consequences for both practitioners and businessmen conducting international transactions are explained by thematic chapters covering all the major topics concerned.

Posted in Uncategorized