DOCSLIB.ORG

Incadat Correspondent Meeting – Report and Recommendations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

THE INCADAT CORRESPONDENT MEETING – REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS CONFÉRENCE DE LA HAYE DE DROIT INTERNATIONAL PRIVÉ ENLÈVEMENT D'ENFANTS HAGUE CONFERENCE ON PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW CHILD ABDUCTION THE INTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION DATABASE (INCADAT) CORRESPONDENT MEETING * * * * * LA REUNION DES CORRESPONDANTS DE LA BASE DE DONNÉES SUR L’ENLÈVEMENT INTERNATIONAL D’ENFANTS (INCADAT) REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS RAPPORT ET RECOMMANDATIONS Bureau Permanent de la Conférence . Scheveningseweg 6 . 2517 KT La Haye . Pays-Bas Permanent Bureau of the Conference . Scheveningseweg 6 . 2517 KT The Hague . Netherlands 1 THE INCADAT CORRESPONDENT MEETING – REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS FINAL LIST OF PARTICIPANTS LISTE DÉFINITIVE DES PARTICIPANTS AUSTRALIA / AUSTRALIE CHINA / CHINE The Honourable Justice Joseph Kay (HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION) Judge of the Family Court of Australia Mr James Ding PO Box 9991 c/o Hague Conference on Private International GPO Melbourne, VIC 3001 Law Tel.: +61 (3) 8600 4219 Scheveningseweg 6 Fax: +61 (3) 8600 4211 2517 KT Den Haag, Netherlands [email protected] Tel.: +31 (70) 363 3303 Fax: +31 (70) 360 4867 AUSTRIA / AUSTRICHE The Honourable Mrs Gudrun Stöger CZECH REPUBLIC / RÉPUBLIQUE TCHÈQUE Judge, Ministry of Justice Mr Rostislav Záleský Bundesministerium für Justiz Director, Office for International Legal Abteilung I 10 Protection of Children A-1016 Vienna Benešova 22 Tel.: +43 (1) 52152 2133 Tel.: +420 (5) 4221 2836 Fax: +43 (1) 52152 2829 Fax: +420 (5) 4221 2836 [email protected] [email protected] CANADA DENMARK / DANEMARK Dr Martha Bailey Ms Maria Isabel Jensen Associate Dean Head of Section Faculty of Law Department of Private Law Queen's University Civilretsdirektoratet Macdonald Hall ?beløgade 1 Union Street DK-2100 Copenhagen Ø Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6 Tel.: +45 33 92 3302 Tel.: +1 (613) 533 6000 ext 77734 Fax: +45 39 27 1889 Fax: +1 (613) 533 6509 [email protected] [email protected] FINLAND / FINLANDE Professor Dominique Goubau Ms Outi Kemppainen Faculté de droit Senior Adviser Université Laval Ministry of Justice Laval, Québec G1K 7P4 PO Box 1 Tel.: +1 (418) 656 2131 ext 2384 00131 Helsinki Fax: +1 (418) 656 7230 Tel.: +358 (9) 1825 7576 [email protected] Fax: +358 (9) 1825 7524 [email protected] Ms Manon Dostie Counsel - Private International Law Team GERMANY / ALLEMAGNE Public Law Policy Section Ms Andrea Schulz Department of Justice Legal Adviser 284 Wellington, Room 5303 Bundesministerium der Justiz Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H8 Mohrenstrasse 37 Tel.: +1 (613) 957 7882 D-10117 Berlin Fax: +1 (613) 941 4088 Tel.: +49 (30) 2025 9203 [email protected] Fax: +49 (30) 2025 9525 [email protected] 2 THE INCADAT CORRESPONDENT MEETING – REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Honourable Mrs Angelika Rieger POLAND / POLOGNE Judge at the Regional Court The Honourable Mrs Katarzyna Biernacka Bundesministerium der Justiz Judge, Head of the International Law Division 10104 Berlin Ministerstwo Sprawiedliwosci Tel.: +49 (30) 2025 9155 Warszawa 00-950 Fax: + 49 (30) 2025 9248 Al. Ujazowskie 11, Skr. Poczt. 33 [email protected] Tel.: +48 (22) 521 2384 Fax: +48 (22) 521 2820 Ms Karin Linhart [email protected] Assistant, University Wurzburg Lienhart-Beys-Strasse 30 97922 Lauda PORTUGAL / PORTUGAL Tel.: +49 (931) 312832 (office) Mr Pedro Miguel Duarte Tel.: +49 (170) 3520689 (home) Central Authority Officer [email protected] International Conventions Unit Instituto de Reinserção Social Ministério da Justiça IRELAND / IRLANDE Avenida Almirante Reis, 101 - 5° Mr Brian Ingoldsby 1150-013 Lisboa Principal Officer, Civil Law Reform Division Tel.: +351 (21) 317 6175 Department of Justice, Equality and Law Fax: +351 (21) 317 6171 Reform [email protected] 43-49 Mespil Road Dublin Tel.: +353 (1) 663 2660 SWEDEN / SUÈDE Fax: +353 (1) 667 0367 Mrs Maarit Jänterä-Jareborg [email protected] Professor of Private International Law and International Civil Procedure Mr Frank Martin Faculty of Law, Uppsala University Lecturer in Law Box 512 Department of Law 75120 Uppsala National University of Ireland Tel.: + 46 (18) 471 2628 Cork Fax: + 46 (18) 471 7666 Tel.: +353 (21) 490 2531 [email protected] Fax: +353 (21) 427 0690 [email protected] SWITZERLAND / SUISSE Mlle Carla Schmid ITALY / ITALIE Avocate auprès de l'autorié centrale en Mr Simone Ranieri matière d'enlèvement international d'enfants Central Authority Officer Office fédéral de la Justice Ministero della Giustizia Section du droit international privé Dipartimento per la Giustizia Minorile Taubenstrasse 16 Via Giulia, 131 CH-3012 Berne 00186 Roma Tel.: +41 (31) 323 8864 Tel.: +39 (06) 6818 8327 Fax: +41 (31) 322 7864 Fax: +39 (06) 6880 8085 [email protected] [email protected] UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND / ROYAUME-UNI DE GRANDE- NETHERLANDS / PAYS-BAS BRETAGNE ET D’IRLANDE DU NORD Mrs Marian H.J. Soutendijk T.M.C. Asser Instituut Mrs Laura McPolin Researcher and Legal Consultant Head of Civil and Family Branch Beekstraat 34, 5673 NA Nuenen Northern Ireland Courts Service Tel.: + 31 (0)40 283 4798 Belfast BT2 7LT, NORTHERN IRELAND Fax: +31 (0)40 283 4798 Tel.: +44 (28) 9032 8594 [email protected] Fax: +44 (28) 9031 4854 [email protected] 3 THE INCADAT CORRESPONDENT MEETING – REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS Mlle Aude Fiorini Ms Laura Mulheron Attachée temporaire d'Enseignement et de Policy Adviser Recherche Scottish Executive Justice Department Université de Paris I Pathéon-Sorbonne Civil Justice and International Division 38 bis, rue du Fer à Moulin Hayweight House 75005 Paris 23, Lauriston Street FRANCE Edinburgh EH3 9DQ SCOTLAND Tel.: + 33 (1) 4331 3137 Tel.: +44 (131) 221 6813 Fax: +31 (1) 4331 3137 Fax: +44 (131) 221 6894 [email protected] [email protected] SECRETARIAT / SECRÉTARIAT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA / Mr Hans van Loon ETATS-UNIS D’AMÉRIQUE Secretary General / Secrétaire général Mr Adair Dyer Former Deputy Secretary General Mr William Duncan Hague Conference on Private Deputy Secretary General / International Law Secrétaire général adjoint Attorney At Law P.O. Box 30020 Mr Christophe Bernasconi Austin, Texas 78755-3020 First Secretary / Premier secrétaire Tel.: +1 (512) 343 7899 Fax: +1 (512) 343 7299 Mr Philippe Lortie [email protected] Secretary / Secrétaire Ms Marion Ely Mr William Hilton, CFLS Legal Officer / Collaboratice juridique Attorney At Law Box 269 Mlle Mariama Diallo Santa Clara, California 95052-0269 Legal Officer / Collaboratrice juridique Tel.: +1 (408) 246 8511 Fax: +1 (408) 246 0114 [email protected] PRESENTERS / PRÉSENTATEURS The Honourable Dr Peter E. Nygh Barrister 7/17 Holbrook Avenue Kirribilli, NSW 2061 AUSTRALIA Tel.: + 61 (2) 9929 5872 Fax: +61 (2) 9929 5872 [email protected], [email protected] Dr Peter McEleavy Legal Consultant to INCADAT Barrister and Lecturer in Law Aberdeen University Law Department, Taylor Building Aberdeen AB24 3UB UNITED KINGDOM Tel.: +44 (1224) 272 000 [email protected] 4 THE INCADAT CORRESPONDENT MEETING – REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS PARTICIPANTS AND FOCUS OF THE CORRESPONDENT MEETING 1. Since the Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction entered into effect, over 1500 decisions based upon, or referring to, the Convention have been reported. In a significant number of those decisions, the judge or authority applied the Convention with little access to important decisions from other parts of the world. 2. As with any private international law treaty it is essential that the Convention is subject to a consistent interpretation throughout its 70 Contracting States. As the geographical scope of the Convention expands to include States on every continent, including Africa, Central Asia and South America, such interpretation assumes a role of even greater importance. 3. To facilitate the goal of consistent interpretation, the Hague Conference has set up the International Child Abduction Database (INCADAT), a database of significant decisions concerning the Convention. The accessibility of international decisions is of value not only to judges and Central Authorities but to legal practitioners, researchers and others. It also provides a unique opportunity to promote mutual understanding and best practice, which is absolutely essential for the effective operation of this international instrument. 4. The INCADAT Correspondent Meeting was convened in order to strengthen the network of individuals contributing to the development of the database; to review the progress of INCADAT; to discuss any problems encountered; and to consider any possible improvements in the database. The overall objective of the meeting was to widen the coverage of INCADAT and to ensure consistency and quality in the reporting of cases. 5. The INCADAT Correspondent Meeting was made possible by a special grant from the Ministry of Justice of the Netherlands. The Permanent Bureau of the Hague Conference gratefully acknowledges the support and sponsorship of INCADAT by the Ministry of Justice. 6. The meeting was opened by Mr Hans van Loon, Secretary General of the Hague Conference on Private International Law. Professor William Duncan, Deputy Secretary General, discussed the role of INCADAT within the context of supporting the 1980 Convention. In this regard, INCADAT is seen as an affirmative step which will lend support to and improve the operation of the Convention. Ms Marion Ely, Legal Officer, provided a brief introduction and overview of INCADAT. THE
Recommended publications
  • Eu:C:2016:813 1 Judgment of 27

    Eu:C:2016:813 1 Judgment of 27

    Report s of C ases JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Fourth Chamber) 27 October 2016 * [Text rectified by order of 7 February 2017] (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Free movement of goods — Articles 34 and 36 TFEU — Quantitative restrictions — Parallel imports of veterinary medicinal products — Directive 2001/82/EC — Article 65 — National system of prior authorisation — Livestock farmers excluded from simplified marketing authorisation procedure — Obligation to hold a wholesale trading authorisation — Obligation to have an establishment within the Member State of import — Pharmacovigilance obligations) In Case C-114/15, REQUEST for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU from the cour d’appel de Pau (Court of Appeal, Pau, France), made by decision of 15 January 2015, received at the Court on 6 March 2015, in the criminal proceedings against Association des utilisateurs et distributeurs de l’agrochimie européenne (Audace), Association des éleveurs solidaires, Cruzalebes EARL, Des deux rivières EARL, Mounacq EARL, Soulard Max EARL, Francisco Xavier Erneta Azanza, Amestoya GAEC, La Vinardière GAEC reconnu, Lagunarte GAEC, André Jacques Iribarren, Ramuntcho Iribarren, Phyteron 2000 SAS, * Language of the case: French. EN ECLI:EU:C:2016:813 1 JUDGMENT OF 27. 10. 2016 — CASE C-114/15 AUDACE AND OTHERS Cataloune SCL, intervening party: Conseil national de l’Ordre des vétérinaires, formerly Conseil supérieur de l’Ordre des vétérinaires, Syndicat national des vétérinaires d’exercice libéral, Administration des douanes et des droits indirects, THE COURT (Fourth Chamber), composed of T. von Danwitz, President of the Chamber, E. Juhász, S. Rodin, K. Jürimäe and C. Lycourgos (Rapporteur), Judges, Advocate General: P. Mengozzi, Registrar: V.
  • 2017 Annual Conference and General Assembly

    2017 Annual Conference and General Assembly

    2017 Annual Conference and General Assembly 6-8 September 2017 Programme Overview Wednesday, 6 September Venue: Vienna City Hall, Lichtenfelsgasse 2 Entrance, 1010 Vienna 09:30 - 10:00 Registration (Council members only) ELI Council Meeting 10:00 - 11:00 Registration (all others) (in its outgoing formation - Council members only) Entrance to Festival Hall Nordbuffet 11:05 -12:35 ELI General Assembly (ELI members only) European Young Lawyers’ Award – Winner’s Presentation Festival Hall 12:35 - 14:00 Buffet Lunch ELI ANNUAL CONFERENCE (ALL CONFERENCE PARTICIPANTS) Venue: Vienna City Hall, Lichtenfelsgasse 2 Entrance, 1010 Vienna 14:00 - 14:30 Welcome Addresses and Introduction Diana Wallis, ELI President Heinz W Engl, Rector of the University of Vienna Paul Oberhammer, Dean of the Law Faculty of the University of Vienna 14:30 - 16:00 Plenary Session: Rescue of Business in Insolvency Law Festival Hall 16:00 - 16:30 Coffee Break 16:30 - 18:00 Detention of Asylum Seekers and Irregular Common Constitutional Principles in Europe Migrants and the Rule of Law Nordbuffet Festival Hall 19:00 - 22:00 Evening Reception Venue: Palais Trautson, Museumstraße 7, 1010 Vienna Thursday, 7 September Venue: Vienna City Hall, Lichtenfelsgasse 2 Entrance, 1010 Vienna 08:00 - 09:00 Registration Entrance to Festival Hall 09:00 - 10:15 From Transnational Principles to European Rules Building a Data Economy of Civil Procedure: Evidence, Provisional Measures and Service of Documents Nordbuffet Festival Hall 10:15 - 10:45 Coffee Break 10:45 - 12:00 The Courts and Alternative
  • A Gentleman's Burden: Difference and the Development of British

    A Gentleman's Burden: Difference and the Development of British

    University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 8-2016 A Gentleman's Burden: Difference and the Development of British Education at Home and in the Empire During the Nineteenth and Early- Twentieth Centuries Jeffrey Willis Grooms University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the African History Commons, European History Commons, Islamic World and Near East History Commons, and the Other History Commons Recommended Citation Grooms, Jeffrey Willis, "A Gentleman's Burden: Difference and the Development of British Education at Home and in the Empire During the Nineteenth and Early-Twentieth Centuries" (2016). Theses and Dissertations. 1623. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/1623 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. A Gentleman's Burden: Difference and the Development of British Education at Home and in the Empire During the Nineteenth and Early-Twentieth Centuries A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History by Jeffrey Grooms University of Arkansas Bachelor of Arts in History and German, 2008 August 2016 University of Arkansas This dissertation is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council. ________________________________________ Dr. Benjamin Grob-Fitzgibbon Dissertation Director ________________________________________ ________________________________________ Dr. Richard Sonn Dr. Andrea Arrington Committee Member Committee Member Abstract A Gentleman's Burden is a comparative analysis of state-funded primary education in Britain, Ireland, West Africa, and India during the nineteenth and early-twentieth cen- turies.
  • Memorandum for Respondent

    Memorandum for Respondent

    ELEVENTH ANNUAL WILLEM C. VIS (EAST) INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION MOOT HONG KONG 31 MARCH TO 6 APRIL 2014 MEMORANDUM FOR RESPONDENT JOHANNES GUTENBERG-UNIVERSITÄT MAINZ On behalf of Against Hope Hospital Innovative Cancer Treatment Ltd. 1-3 Hospital Road 46 Commerce Road Oceanside Capital City Equatoriana Mediterraneo (RESPONDENT) (CLAIMANT) COUNSEL Nele Bienert Julika Großmann Marina Mertens Katie Scott Kerstin Warhaut JOHANNES GUTENBERG-UNIVERSITÄT MAINZ TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................................... II INDEX OF ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................................. IV TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ..................................................................................................... VI TABLE OF COURT DECISIONS ............................................................................................. XIV TABLE OF ARBITRAL AWARDS............................................................................................. XIX STATEMENT OF FACTS ......................................................................................................... 1 ARGUMENT ON THE PROCEDURAL ISSUES ......................................................................... 3 FIRST ISSUE: THE TRIBUNAL LACKS JURISDICTION REGARDING BOTH CLAIMS .............. 3 1. The FSA is not governed by a valid arbitration agreement ....................................... 3 1.1 The
  • A Comparison of the American and French(–Inspired) Appellate Model

    A Comparison of the American and French(–Inspired) Appellate Model

    A COMPARISON OF THE AMERICAN AND FRENCH(–INSPIRED) APPELLATE MODEL Tesis Submitted as Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Judicial Studies by Frederic BLOCKX Both the American and the French legal system have a three-tiered strucure. However, the respecive roles and funcions of the courts on each step of the ladder is vastly different in both. Whereas the general system in the U.S. is to have one trial court and two ‘higher’ courts (a court of appeals and a supreme court), the French / European continental system consists of two ‘facual’ courts (the basic level and the court of appeals), and one ‘legal’ (the supreme court) with limited or even inexistent possibilities to look at the facs. Te purpose of this thesis is to look at these two models of division of labor between the three tiers through the lens of (i) the procedural leeway each of the courts has and (ii) their focus on fac or law, in funcion of what questions can be raised in appeal and have to be answered by the courts. We will add Germany to the comparison, as (i) the strucure of its court system was inspired by the French, but (ii) has evolved over the years and has been recently (2002) over- hauled specifically as to appeals, both to the second level of courts and to the supreme court. We will do so by examining the avenues open for the parties in filing an appeal as well as for the courts in adjudicating those. It will be clear that the distinc philosophies regarding the appellate systems have influence on the entire organization of the different court systems.
  • European Synthesis Report on the Judicial Implementation of Chapter III of the Return Directive Procedural Safeguards

    European Synthesis Report on the Judicial Implementation of Chapter III of the Return Directive Procedural Safeguards

    RETURN DIRECTIVE DIALOGUE – REDIAL European Synthesis Report on the Judicial Implementation of Chapter III of the Return Directive Procedural safeguards Madalina Moraru Géraldine Renaudiere Supervision by Philippe De Bruycker REDIAL Research Report 2016/03 CO-FINANCED BY THE EUROPEAN UNION REDIAL REturn Directive DIALogue Research Report REDIAL RR 2016/03 European Synthesis Report on the Judicial Implementation of Chapter III of the Return Directive Procedural safeguards Madalina Moraru * Géraldine Renaudiere * Supervision by Philippe De Bruycker * * Migration Policy Centre, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute This text may be downloaded only for personal research purposes. Any additional reproduction for other purposes, whether in hard copies or electronically, requires the consent of the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies. Requests should be addressed to [email protected] If cited or quoted, reference should be made as follows: Madalina Moraru, Géraldine Renaudiere (supervision by Philippe De Bruycker), European Synthesis Report on the Judicial Implementation of Chapter III of the Return Directive – Procedural safeguards, REDIAL RR 2016/03, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, San Domenico di Fiesole (FI): European University Institute, 2016. The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) only and should not be considered as representative of the official position of the European Commission or of the European University Institute. © 2016, European University Institute ISBN: 978-92-9084-435-8 doi:10.2870/340275 Catalogue Number: QM-01-16-659-EN-N European University Institute Badia Fiesolana I – 50014 San Domenico di Fiesole (FI) Italy http://www.eui.eu/RSCAS/Publications/ http://interact-project.eu/publications/ http://cadmus.eui.eu REDIAL – REturn Directive DIALogue The project REDIAL (REturn Directive DIALogue) is co-funded by the European Union within the framework of the European Return Fund.
  • 191 Launceston Tasmania 7250 State Secretary: Secretary@Tasfhs.Org Journal Editors: Editors@Tasfhs.Org Home Page

    191 Launceston Tasmania 7250 State Secretary: [email protected] Journal Editors: [email protected] Home Page

    Tasmanian Family History Society Inc. PO Box 191 Launceston Tasmania 7250 State Secretary: [email protected] Journal Editors: [email protected] Home Page: http://www.tasfhs.org Patron: Dr Alison Alexander Fellows: Dr Neil Chick, David Harris and Denise McNeice Executive: President Anita Swan (03) 6326 5778 Vice President Maurice Appleyard (03) 6248 4229 Vice President Peter Cocker (03) 6435 4103 State Secretary Muriel Bissett (03) 6344 4034 State Treasurer Betty Bissett (03) 6344 4034 Committee: Judy Cocker Jim Rouse Kerrie Blyth Brian Hortle Leo Prior John Gillham Libby Gillham Helen Stuart Judith Whish-Wilson By-laws Officer Denise McNeice (03) 6228 3564 Assistant By-laws Officer Maurice Appleyard (03) 6248 4229 Webmaster Robert Tanner (03) 6231 0794 Journal Editors Anita Swan (03) 6326 5778 Betty Bissett (03) 6344 4034 LWFHA Coordinator Anita Swan (03) 6394 8456 Members’ Interests Compiler John Gillham (03) 6239 6529 Membership Registrar Muriel Bissett (03) 6344 4034 Publications Coordinator Denise McNeice (03) 6228 3564 Public Officer Denise McNeice (03) 6228 3564 State Sales Officer Betty Bissett (03) 6344 4034 Branches of the Society Burnie: PO Box 748 Burnie Tasmania 7320 [email protected] Devonport: PO Box 587 Devonport Tasmania 7310 [email protected] Hobart: PO Box 326 Rosny Park Tasmania 7018 [email protected] Huon: PO Box 117 Huonville Tasmania 7109 [email protected] Launceston: PO Box 1290 Launceston Tasmania 7250 [email protected] Volume 29 Number 1 June 2008 ISSN 0159 0677 Contents Editorial ..................................................................................................................
  • Memorandum for Claimant

    Memorandum for Claimant

    TWENTY-EIGHTH ANNUAL WILLEM C. VIS INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION MOOT MEMORANDUM FOR CLAIMANT on behalf of: against: RespiVac plc CamVir Ltd CLAIMANT RESPONDENT NO. 1 and VectorVir Ltd RESPONDENT NO. 2 JUKKA HEINEMAA • PIA KEMPPINEN • ALEKSI KOMULAINEN OONA-MARIA KULTTI • ANNIKA LAAKERISTO JALMARI MÄNNISTÖ • AAPO TAPIO Counsel for CLAIMANT Memorandum for CLAIMANT TABLE OF CONTENTS INDEX OF AUTHORITIES .................................................................................................................................... v INDEX OF CASES ............................................................................................................................................... xxvi OTHER MATERIALS .......................................................................................................................................... xlvii STATEMENT OF FACTS ......................................................................................................................................... 1 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS ............................................................................................................................... 3 ARGUMENTS ON THE PROCEEDINGS .......................................................................................................... 4 I. Ross Pharmaceuticals should not be joined to the Proceedings ................................................. 4 The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to join Ross Pharmaceuticals.................................... 4 The Parties’ subscription
  • The Judicial System of France

    The Judicial System of France

    THE AMERICAN LAW REGISTER. DECEMBER, 1869. THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM OF FRANCE. FRANCE, with a population of 37,000,000, is divided into 86 departments; each department is divided into districts, or, as they are called, arrondissements, of which there are 363, in each of which is a court, known as the Tribunal of First Instance, making 363 of these courts. Each district is divided into cantons, of which there are 2847, each canton into communes or parishes, of which there are 36,819. In each canton there is a justice of the peace, who decides sum- Inarily, without the intervention of attorneys, all matters in con- tests of small importance, and has jurisdiction in criminal matters where the fine imposed does not exceed fifteen francs ($3), or where the imprisonment is for five days or less. The Tribunal of Jus- tice of the Peace also acts with the consent of parties as a court of conciliation. There are 2847 justices of the peace. They are all salaried officers, and are professional men. The maires of communes also exercise, it would seem, some judicial author- ity. The appeal from the decision of the Tribunal of the Justice of the Peace, is to the Tribunal of the First Instance of the district. TRiBUNALS oF FiRsT IwSTANCF The Tribunal of the First Instance is composed of from three- to twelve judges, according to the population of the district. If VoL. XVII.--45 (70s) THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM OF FRANCE. the court has seven or more judges, it is divided into two cham- bers, one of which has charge of criminal and the other of civil matters.
  • Education, Globalisation and the Role of Comparative Research

    Education, Globalisation and the Role of Comparative Research

    London Review of Education, Vol. 1, No. 2, July 2003 Education, Globalisation and the Role of Comparative Research ANDY GREEN Institute of Education, University of London, UK ABSTRACT Comparative education has traditionally meant the study of national education systems. But how far is this approach valid today? Doesn’t the ‘decline’ of the nation state make national systems obsolete? Isn’t the very idea of a ‘system’ anachronistic in a world of market triumphalism and global disorganization? The purpose of this article is to explore how globalisation is changing education and the implication of this for comparative study. Why study education systems and why study national education systems in particular? What else should comparativists study, and how? What defines the field of comparative education? These questions are approached first historically and secondly methodologically. Introduction Comparative education has traditionally meant the study of national education systems. The field first developed in the early nineteenth century in parallel with the rise of national education, and it took the national system as its main object of enquiry (Noah & Epstein, 1969). The twentieth century comparativists who consolidated it as an academic subject, including Michael Sadler, Isaac Kandel and Nicholas Hans, continued to focus on the classification and explanation of characteristics of different national systems. But how far is this approach valid today? Doesn’t the ‘decline’ of the nation state make national systems obsolete? And isn’t the very idea of a ‘system’ anachronistic in a world of market triumphalism and global disorganization? As Peter Jarvis asks in a recent edition of Comparative Education, ‘Why should we undertake comparative analysis at all in this Global Village?’ (Jarvis, 2000, p.
  • The French Legal System

    The French Legal System

    The French legal system Judicial system 3 Administrative courts 7 Training of judges and personnel in the justice system 8 The criminal proceedings 10 Juvenile Justice system 11 Sentence application and prison system 13 Judicial System Constitution and institutional system The fifth French Constitution was promulgated on October 4, 1958. The Constitution is the highest norm in the internal hierarchy. The Constitutional Council in 1971 cited the Constitution’s Preamble and the Declaration of the Man and of the Citizen (1789) as texts included in the Constitutional Principles. Moreover, the Fundamental Principles of the Republic expressed by the Constitutional Council and the Environment Charter of 2004 are also part of the “constitutional block”. The Constitution can be amended either by the French congress (joint session of both chambers of Parliament) or by referendum. The French Constitution was fondamentaly changed Constitutional Council members are appointed for nine on 23 July 2008 by the constitutional revision bill of years (three every three years). Three are appointed by modernization of the institutions of the Fifth the President of the Republic, three by the President of Republic. All branches of Government are affected the Senate and three by the President of the National by this reform. First, the exercise of the Executive Assembly. Former Presidents of the Republic are ex power is modified. The revision puts an end to the officio life members of the Constitutional Council. ambiguous diarchy between the President of the Republic and the Prime Minister. Indeed, it The 1958 Constitution establishes a Democracy recognises the supremacy of the President of the based on the Separation of Powers.
  • French Correctional Courts Damon C

    French Correctional Courts Damon C

    Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume 23 Article 3 Issue 1 May--June Summer 1932 French Correctional Courts Damon C. Woods Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons Recommended Citation Damon C. Woods, French Correctional Courts, 23 Am. Inst. Crim. L. & Criminology 20 (1932-1933) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized editor of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. THE FRENCH CORRECTIONAL COURTS DAMON C. WOODS' Dealing with offenses intermediate between minor misdemeanors and major felonies, according to the common law classification, the correctional courts of France probably exercise a greater repressive influence upon crime than any other class of French tribunals. These courts in their operation present the following characteristics, which account in large measure for their efficiency: 1. Each court is composed of three judges, who act without a jury. 2. The President of the court directs the proceedings from beginning to end. 3. The discretion exercised is so extensive that few cases are appealed and only a small fraction of these are reversed. 4. Only one trial is possible and it always yields a decision; the court of appeals never sends a case back but re-tries it if necessary and renders a final judgment. 5. Civil liabilities arising from the offense are adjudicated in the criminal action.