Forum Non Conveniens doctrine – post Brexit applicability in transnational litigation

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216224%3A14220%2F22%3A00126364" target="_blank" >RIV/00216224:14220/22:00126364 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://journals.muni.cz/cpvp/article/view/15654/16954" target="_blank" >https://journals.muni.cz/cpvp/article/view/15654/16954</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5817/CPVP2022-2-3" target="_blank" >10.5817/CPVP2022-2-3</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Forum Non Conveniens doctrine – post Brexit applicability in transnational litigation

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

The article follows the origin of the English forum non conveniens doctrine development in stay proceedings, its alterations, and applicable tests leading to CJEU’s decision in Owusu. Owusu ultimately forbade English courts to stay its proceedings and allow a “more convenient” forum to decide on the dispute merits in cases where the jurisdiction was conferred by the Brussels regime – not only concerning other EU courts but worldwide. With the UK’s withdrawal from the EU, a question appears whether English courts might again exercise this power. If affirmatory, the paper proceeds to assess various applicable, or presumably fitting, instruments, both for allocation of jurisdiction, and recognition and enforcement of judgments – Lugano Convention, Hague Convention 2005, and Hague Convention 2019. The paper also assesses how these instruments might interact with the use of forum non conveniens doctrine.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Forum Non Conveniens doctrine – post Brexit applicability in transnational litigation

Popis výsledku anglicky

The article follows the origin of the English forum non conveniens doctrine development in stay proceedings, its alterations, and applicable tests leading to CJEU’s decision in Owusu. Owusu ultimately forbade English courts to stay its proceedings and allow a “more convenient” forum to decide on the dispute merits in cases where the jurisdiction was conferred by the Brussels regime – not only concerning other EU courts but worldwide. With the UK’s withdrawal from the EU, a question appears whether English courts might again exercise this power. If affirmatory, the paper proceeds to assess various applicable, or presumably fitting, instruments, both for allocation of jurisdiction, and recognition and enforcement of judgments – Lugano Convention, Hague Convention 2005, and Hague Convention 2019. The paper also assesses how these instruments might interact with the use of forum non conveniens doctrine.

Druh

J_SC - Článek v periodiku v databázi SCOPUS

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

50501 - Law

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

S - Specificky vyzkum na vysokych skolach

Rok uplatnění

2022

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Časopis pro právní vědu a praxi

ISSN

1210-9126

e-ISSN

1805-2789

Svazek periodika

30

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

2

Stát vydavatele periodika

CZ - Česká republika

Počet stran výsledku

19

Strana od-do

285-303

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85141232580