Quentin Decleve, Author at international litigation blog - Page 11 of 19
archive,paged,author,author-quentin,author-2,paged-11,author-paged-11,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,select-child-theme-ver-1.0.0,select-theme-ver-3.4,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-4.12.1,vc_responsive

Author:Quentin Decleve

CJEU Rules on Issues of Lis Pendens and Jurisdiction Under Lugano Convention

Dear Readers – Happy New Year!

For a fresh start to the year, I wanted to highlight a recent judgment (dated 20 December 2017) of the Court of Justice of the European Union (the CJEU) which interprets the jurisdictional and lis pendens requirements contained in the Convention on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (the Lugano Convention). As most of you know, the Lugano Convention aims at extending the Brussels I Regulation’s regime on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters within the EU to Iceland, Norway and Switzerland.READ MORE


Data Protection & International Litigation: Upcoming Developments in U.S. and EU Laws

As you would certainly have noted, data protection is on the rise and has become a daily source of concern for individuals as well as companies and businesses (suffice it to recall that, on 25 May 2018, the EU Global Data Protection Regulation (i.e. European Union’s major updated legislation on privacy and data protection) will enter into force. Meanwhile Uber and Equifax have just suffered major data breaches).

As demonstrated by the two cases below, international litigation is not immune from the flurry of excitement over privacy and data protection.

Maximilian Schrems v. Facebook Ireland Limited

The first case concerns a dispute pending before the Court of Justice of the European Union (the CJEU) between Maximilian Schrems and Facebook Ireland Limited (Facebook or Facebook Ireland).

Maximilian Schrems is a well-known Austrian activist in the field of technology and electronic privacy. Previously, Mr. Schrems had successfully challenged the transfer of data from the EU to the U.S. through the Safe Harbour regime.

In the present case, Mr. Schrems (who maintained two presences on Facebook: (i) an “account“, which was for personal use, and (ii) a public “page” used for promoting his books, lectures, media appearances and fundraising activities) sued Facebook Ireland, the European subsidiary of Facebook Inc., for alleged violations of his data protection rights, as well as those of seven other Facebook users.READ MORE


OHADA Adopts and Updates Laws on Arbitration and Mediation

On 23 and 24 November 2017, the Council of Ministers of OHADA (“L’Organisation pour l’Harmonisation en Afrique du Droit des Affaires” – OHADA) adopted three major tools aimed at favouring alternative dispute resolution mechanisms in African countries. More specifically, the Council of Ministers adopted (i) a new Uniform Act on Mediation; (ii) a revised Uniform Act on Arbitration; and (iii) updated rules of arbitration of the Common Court of Justice and Arbitration (the CCJA).READ MORE


China Signs The Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements

On 12 September 2017, the People’s Republic of China (China) signed The Hague Convention of 30 June 2005 on Choice of Court Agreements (the Convention).

This Convention aims at encouraging international judicial cooperation by requiring courts of member States (i) to respect exclusive forum clauses agreed upon by parties in their commercial agreements (Chapter II of the Convention); and (ii) to recognise and enforce judgments and court decisions rendered by a court of a contracting state designated in a choice of court agreement (Chapter III of the Convention).READ MORE


Latest Developments on Multilateral Investment Court – EU Commission Holds Stakeholder Meeting

As I have already discussed in previous articles, the European Commission (the Commission) has been pushing forward a proposal for the establishment of a multilateral investment court (the Multilateral Investment Court) in order to address the numerous criticisms concerning existing investor-State dispute resolution (ISDS) mechanisms.

In essence, the Commission’s proposal aims at dealing with procedural issues arising in the context of ISDS. In this vein the Commission proposes:

(i) The creation of a Multilateral Investment Court which would have exclusive jurisdiction to rule on investment claims and would therefore render forum-shopping and multiple parallel proceedings impossible;

(ii) That this Multilateral Investment Court would consist of a First Instance Tribunal and an Appellate Tribunal;

(iii) That judgments would be made by publicly appointed judges; and

(iv) That proceedings would be transparent; and

(v) That all interested parties would have a right to intervene.READ MORE