Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /homepages/26/d238996107/htdocs/wp-content/plugins/popup-maker-wp/com/classes/SGPMOutput.php on line 46
Sélectionner une page

50 See Anterist in C-22/85 [14]: « Since Article 17 of the Convention incare the principle of autonomy of the parties to designate the competent courts or jurisdictions, the third paragraph of this provision must be interpreted in such a way as to preserve the common intention of the parties at the conclusion of the contract. » Meeth C-23/78 [5]: « This interpretation is justified on the basis that Article 17 is based on the recognition of the independent will of the parties to decide which jurisdictions are competent to resolve disputes within the scope of the convention … ` (Added highlight). 85 Compare Keyes and Marshall (n 21) 345 to 352 and conclude that the redesign agreements will not be exclusive if they do not exclude the jurisdiction of all but the only jurisdiction chosen. 20 A unilateral waiver that would otherwise have been found in other courts: Briggs (2012) LMCLQ 364 (n 4) 378. In this book, the author analyzes the law and practice with respect to the classification, drafting, validity and execution of contracts relating to jurisdiction and the choice of law. The emphasis is on English law, EU law and common law measures, but there are also comparative documents. The book will be particularly useful for practising lawyers who wish to design, interpret or enforce the types of contracts discussed, but the in-depth discussion will also be useful for academic lawyers specializing in private international law. This book was written by an academic, who is also a practising lawyer, and provides a detailed description of how the instruments and principles of private international law can be used to resolve cross-border or transnational disputes. It examines the application and application of the Brussels Regulation, the Rome Convention and the Hague Convention on the Exclusive Choice of Judicial Agreements in such disputes – but it also examines court judgments and decisions in important cases such as Turner/Grovit, Union Discount/Zoller and De Wolf/Cox. Much of the book will be left to the practical discretion of how jurisdictional and statutory choice agreements should be developed, including guidelines for the development of agreements (including certain standard clauses), separation of agreements, consent and resolution of disputes through arbitration. 4 See z.B Briggs, A `The Subtle Variety of Jurisdiction Agreements` (2012) LMCLQ 364 , 376. See Joseph, D, judicial and arbitration agreements and their application (3rd Edn, Sweet and Maxwell 2015) [4.03]: arguing that exclusive and non-exclusive jurisdictional agreements and the distinction between them are essential for the application of the redesign of BIR, Lugano II and The Hague. the jurisdictional regime applicable to a particular dispute, see practical opinion: rules of jurisdiction – it defines the jurisdictional regime applicable between different countries 67 See also Briggs, and stresses that the ECJ « was built to insist that the validity and jurisdictional effect of a forum agreement under Article 23 should not be judged in reference to a national law,…

but only to the question of whether the consent of the contracting party, which must be in accordance with the agreement, can be demonstrated with clarity and precision »: (2012) LMCLQ 364 (n 4), 378.