Since its inception in 2001, the annual survey on Chinese judicial practice in private international law, published by the Chinese Journal of International Law, has served as a valuable source of information on Chinese practice in private international law, particularly during periods when case law was not readily available (notably prior to 2013). The first annual survery, titled ‘Private International Law in the Chinese Judicial Practice in 2001’, appeared in Vol. 2(1), 2003, and was prepared by Professors Huang Jin and Du Huangfang. However, in its early years, the survey was not published on a regular basis. Indeed, in addition to the 2001 survey, only three others were published between 2005 and 2014: the survey for the year 2002 (published in 2005), for 2003 (published in 2008), and for 2006 (published in 2009).
Since 2015, the regular publication of the survey has been ensured by Professor He Qisheng of Peking University Law School under the title “Chronology of Practice: Chinese Practice in Private International Law”. (For previous announcements on this blog, see the posts for 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021. Annual surveys for the years 2013 to 2018 are also available on Professor He’s SSRN page.) Professor He’s dedication to maintaining and expanding the annual survey has been instrumental in ensuring it remains an indispensable resource for the field, while making information on private international law in China readily accessible to non-Sinophone researchers.
With that said, the Chronology of Practice: Chinese Practice in Private International Law in 2023 is now available, marking the 11th consecutive annual survey since 2015. This year’s edition is particularly noteworthy as it includes English translations of recently enacted legal provisions, include among others:
Like its predecessors, this year’s survey provides important updates and further enhances accessibility to key legal developments for researchers and practitioners of private international law.
The abstract of 2023 survey reads as follows:
The survey of the Chinese practices in private international law in 2023 highlights the following aspects: First, four new laws and two administrative regulations, three judicial interpretations by the Supreme People’s Court (“SPC”) have been formulated, and six groups of 44 typical cases have been selected by the SPC. Notably, China acceded to the Hague Apostille Convention this year. Additionally, Chinese courts concluded 24,000 foreign-related civil and commercial cases, 16,000 maritime cases, and 16,000 commercial arbitration judicial review cases. Second, Part IV of the Civil Procedure Law was amended to include new provisions addressing jurisdiction, service of process abroad, taking of evidence and periods, as well as recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments and arbitral awards. These new rules and relevant cases are presented throughout the Survey. Third, the application of international treaties and practices has emerged as a significant topic, with new rules in the Foreign Relations Law and the SPC Interpretation of International Treaties and International Practices. Additionally, the SPC selected 14 representative cases in this regard. Fourth, concerning the ascertainment of foreign laws, the SPC issued two judicial interpretations and selected three relevant cases. Fifth, regarding the judicial review of arbitration cases, the SPC has selected several Typical Cases of Judicial Review of Arbitration, which serve as significant guiding examples.
The table of content of the paper is as follows:
I. Introduction
II. Overview
III. Jurisdiction
I.V. Choice of law
V. International conventions and international practices
VI. Service of process, taking of evidence and periods
VII. Foreign Judgments
VIII. International arbitration and foreign arbitral awards
La rédaction de Dalloz actualité prend ses quartiers d’hiver, le temps des fêtes de fin d’année bien méritées !
Nous serons de retour dès le mardi 7 janvier 2025.
Merci de votre fidélité et joyeuses fêtes !
La Cour européenne des droits de l’homme estime que, pour condamner les journalistes, les juridictions internes se sont prononcées par des motifs pertinents et suffisants, sans excéder leur marge d’appréciation, et ont ainsi pu considérer que l’ingérence dans leur droit à la liberté d’expression était nécessaire, dans une société démocratique, à la protection de la réputation et des droits d’autrui.
The University of Edinburgh is looking to fill a new position in Global Law – which is understood to include private international law. More here.
Une action introduite dans un État membre contre une société, tendant au paiement de marchandises livrées, bien qu’elle ne fasse état ni de la procédure d’insolvabilité antérieurement ouverte contre cette société dans un autre État membre ni du fait que la créance a déjà été déclarée dans la masse de l’insolvabilité, ne constitue pas une action dérivant directement de la procédure d’insolvabilité et s’y insérant étroitement. Par conséquent, elle ne relève pas de la compétence exclusive du tribunal de la procédure d’insolvabilité.
Le délai imposé à la cour d’appel afin de statuer sur le recours contre une décision reconnaissant le caractère exécutoire, sur le territoire français, d’une condamnation prononcée par un État membre de l’Union européenne n’est assorti d’aucune sanction.
The latest volume (Volume 4) of the Ius Comparatum series, which includes the general reports as well as the national and special reports from the General Congresses and Thematic Congresses of the International Academy of Comparative Law, along with other publications related to the Academy’s activities, has been published. This volume focuses on the Localization of Damage in Private International Law, edited by Prof. Olivera Boskovic (Université Paris Cité).
The book addresses the complex issue of the localization of damage in private international law, a challenge that has long puzzled legal scholars and practitioners. This comparative work brings together contributions from different jurisdictions to address the many issues raised, as outlined in the book’s blurb below:
Localisation in private international law of torts is a notoriously difficult question. How do you localize financial or moral damage? What about latent damage? Should damage in the context of cyber-torts be localized differently? The great variety of tortious actions gives rise to endless difficulties ranging from banal situations involving material damage to climate change. Trying to find suitable solutions requires answering many difficult questions, such as the very definition of damage within the meaning of private international law rules, the influence of various considerations such as foreseeability, protection of the claimant, and the remedy sought. The contributions in this volume address these questions and more from the perspectives of 17 different countries, from Austria to Venezuela.
The table of content features the following contributions:
PART 1 – General Report
La Localisation du Dommage en Droit International Prive?, Rapport Général 3
Olivera Boskovic
PART 2 – National Reports
Austria 71
Florian Heindler
Canada (common law) 96
Joost Blom
China 134
Zhengxin Huo and Zheng Sophia Tang
Colombia 147
Daniel Rojas-Tamayo
Czech Republic 160
Monika Pauknerová and Magdalena Pfeiffer
France 190
Par Ludovic Pailler
Germany 213
Wolfgang Wurmnest and Benedikt Wössner
Hungary 260
Tamás Szabados
Italy 275
Angelo Davì
Japan 334
Naoshi Takasugi
Poland 361
Micha? Wojewoda and Marcin Kostwi?ski
Romania 388
Serban-Alexandru St?nescu, Teodora-Maria Bantas-V?duva and Ana-Maria Dimofte
Quebec 423
Naivi Chikoc Barreda
Turkey 452
Cemile Demir Gökyayla and Candan Yasan Tepeta?
United Kingdom 476
Sirko Harder
United States 515
Patrick J. Borchers
Venezuela 530
Claudia Madrid Martíne
La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne précise les limites du pouvoir d’appréciation dont dispose l’administration de l’Union européenne lors de l’exécution d’un arrêt annulant une décision adoptée dans le cadre d’une procédure disciplinaire.
On Thursday, January 23, 2025, at 5 pm, the Société de législation comparée will present the Box Set Le droit étranger – Études de droit international privé comparé. The event will take place in 28 rue Saint-Guillaume – Amphitheater, 1st floor, 75007 Paris. Everybody is welcome to attend.
On the Box Set: Over the past ten years, the Société de législation comparée has conducted a series of collective studies on the theoretical, methodological, and practical issues related to accessing, understanding, and implementing foreign law. These issues are highly relevant today. Foreign law is playing an increasingly significant role in practice—not only for judges, of course, but also for other practitioners such as notaries, civil registrars, and lawyers. In France and elsewhere, when judges, notaries, or civil registrars are required to apply foreign law, understanding and implementing an unfamiliar legal system present numerous challenges. These challenges are even more daunting given that the treatment of foreign law retains a profoundly national dimension, despite the growing unification of conflict-of-law rules in Europe and in Americas.
The studies conducted by the Société de législation comparée aim to go beyond conventional analyses. By exploring the positive law of various countries and regions, they shed light on grey areas, shortcomings, and contradictions — abundant in what constitutes the very essence of Private International Law. Now gathered in a single volume they provide academics and practitioners with a comprehensive overview of the reflections carried out by jurists from diverse backgrounds on the most pressing issues in this often-neglected area of conflict of laws, along with their proposals to ensure the most accurate establishment of foreign law content.
The texts were compiled by Gustavo Cerqueira, professor at Université Côte d’Azur, and Nicolas Nord, Secretary General of the International Commission on Civil Status.
Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer