THE BRUSSELS I REGULATION RECAST PDF
846 Pages·2015·88.8727 MB·other
Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.
Preview THE BRUSSELS I REGULATION RECAST
Description:
This book, conceived in an Italian restaurant near Russell Square, contains commentary on
the Recast Brussels I Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012), an important piece of
European Union legislation governing questions of jurisdiction and the recognition and
enforcement of judgments in civil proceedings instituted on or after 10 January 2015 before
the courts of the Member States. This commentary is intended to serve two main purposes.
First, it serves as an introduction for all interested parties to the Regulation’s structure, objec-
tives, provisions, ancestry, and legislative history, as well as to the key jurisprudence of the
Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) interpreting the Regulation’s predecessors,
the 1968 Brussels Convention and the 2001 Regulation (Regulation (EC) No 44/2001).
Secondly, it serves as a more detailed guide to the novel features of the Regulation, in com-
parison with its predecessors. Having stated these objectives, no doubt modest, but chal-
lenging enough in themselves, it is important that we disclaim any intention to produce a
comprehensive commentary on the application of all provisions of the Brussels I regime, to
identify all relevant national case law, or to identify and address each and every issue that
will trouble national courts and the CJEU in the future. That seems impossible in a single
volume of this size, developed and then written in the period of around two years since the
Regulation was approved. Instead, we hope that the commentary will serve as a point of
reference, establishing a framework and foundation for further study and research.
We have given our authors, as experts in the field, a broad mandate to address those aspects
of the Recast Regulation that they consider important or controversial, with the requirement
that they should at the same time explain the key features of the Articles assigned to them. As
editors, we have seen our main role as being to review submissions, to ask questions of our
authors when appropriate, and to ensure consistency of presentation throughout the work.
We have not sought to impose an ‘editorial line’ or to create a single voice throughout the
work. We are also conscious that there are issues, at the intersection of two or more provi-
sions, on which our authors disagree—in those cases, we have sought to flag the differences
of opinion by cross-references, without seeking to resolve them.
See more
The list of books you might like
Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.
