DOCSLIB.ORG

Sc 2007 Child Support / Maintenance June 2021 (Tbd) Prel

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sc 2007 Child Support / Maintenance June 2021 (Tbd) Prel SC 2007 CHILD SUPPORT / MAINTENANCE JUNE 2021 (TBD) PREL. DOC. NO 4 (SECOND REVISED VERSION) Compilation of responses received to the August 2019 Title Questionnaire on the 2007 Child Support Convention Prel. Doc. No 4 of October 2020 (second revised version) – Document available in English only with responses in the language in which they were received Author PB Agenda Item TBD Mandate(s) C&R No 28 of the 2019 CGAP; C&D Nos 22-24 of the 2020 CGAP To share responses received until 27 October 2020 from Members of Objective HCCH to Prel. Doc. No 1 of August 2019 For Action ☐ For Approval Action to be Taken ☐ For Decision ☐ For Information ☒ Annexes N.A. Prel. Doc. No 1 of August 2019 – Questionnaire on the practical operation of the Convention of 23 November 2007 on the Related Documents International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance Hague Conference on Private International Law Conférence de La Haye de droit international privé [email protected] www.hcch.net Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (ROAP) Bureau régional pour l’Asie et le Pacifique (BRAP) Regional Office for Latin America and the Caribbean (ROLAC) Bureau régional pour l’Amérique latine et les Caraïbes (BRALC) QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE PRACTICAL OPERATION OF THE CONVENTION OF 23 NOVEMBER 2007 ON THE INTERNATIONAL RECOVERY OF CHILD SUPPORT AND OTHER FORMS OF FAMILY MAINTENANCE Wherever your replies to this Questionnaire make reference to domestic legislation, rules, guidance or case law relating to the practical operation of the 2007 Convention, please provide a copy of the referenced documentation in (a) the original language and, (b) wherever possible, accompanied by a translation into English and / or French. Name of State or territorial unit: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belarus, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile (1956 New York Convention), Colombia (1956 New York Convention), Croatia, Cyprus, Dominican Republic, Finland, France, Germany (CA), Germany (DIJUF), Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Mexico, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine, United Kingdom (England), United States of America Name of contact person: Argentina Juan José Cerdeira (Dirección Nacional Asuntos Internacionales) Mariana Franco (Cooperación Internacional en materia civil) Australia Helen Foon Austria Robert Fucik, Angelo Rosenberg Belarus Anastasiya Kudyrko Brazil Lalisa Froeder Dittrich Bulgaria Kalina Kaludina Canada Manon Dostie and Andina van Isschot Chile (1956 New York JAVIERA VERDUGO Convention) Colombia (1956 New Doctora Andrea León López Subdirectora de Adopciones Correo electrónico: York Convention) [email protected] Andrea Carolina Mogollón Caballero Abogada – Autoridad Central Colombiana Correo electrónico: [email protected] Andrés Julián Monsalve Monje Abogado – Autoridad Central Colombiana Correo electrónico: [email protected] Edid Viviana Abril Bolívar Abogada – Autoridad Central Colombiana Correo electrónico: [email protected] Manuela Beaudoin Valenzuela Abogada – Autoridad Central Correo electrónico: [email protected] Mariana García Jimeno Abogada – Autoridad Central Colombiana Correo electrónico: [email protected] Miguel Angel Urrego García Abogado – Autoridad Central Colombiana Correo electrónico: [email protected] Agrade Croatia Ms Jasna Palic Babic, Head of Service Ms Dina Šobot, Expert Associate Cyprus Dionysiou Troodia Dominican Republic Aly Peña Finland Tanja Niemi, Maija Leppä France Carine Viallon 1 Germany (CA) Germany (DIJUF) Katharina Lohse/ Natalie Faetan Hungary dr. Czellecz Botond Latvia Legal Advisor Mrs Skrinda Inese Lithuania Vaida Pakalniškyte Luxembourg Monique Schmitz (avocat général) Mexico Luis Gabriel Ferrer Ortega Netherlands L. den Haan / N. Vels Nicaragua Johana Vanessa Flores Jiménez Norway Siri Risnes Poland Aneta Ludwiczak Portugal Paulo Gonçalves Romania Viviana Onaca Slovenia Vesna Lapanja Sweden Linda-Marie Danell Switzerland Sandra John Ukraine Tetiana Riabets United Kingdom (England) Mr Mark Stevens United States of America Anne Miller Name of Authority / Office: Argentina MINISTERIO DE JUSTICIA Y DERECHOS HUMANOS DIRECCION NACIONAL ASUNTOS INTERNACIONALES COOPERACION INTERNACIONAL EN MATERIA CIVIL (Transmitting and Receiving Agency to the Convention on the Recovery Abroad of Maintenance, New York, 1956) Australia Department of Human Services, Australia Austria Federal Ministry of Justice/Central Authority Belarus Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Belarus Brazil Ministry of Justice Bulgaria Ministry of Justice, “International Legal Child Support And Intercountry Adoptions” Directorate Canada N/A Chile (1956 New York Corporación de Asistencia Judicial Convention) 2 Colombia (1956 New York Convention) Croatia Ministry for Demography, Family, Youth and Social Policy, Directorate for International Affairs and Programmes, Sector for International Cooperation, Service for International Cooperation in the field of Protection of Children and Coordination of Social Security Systems Cyprus Unit for International Legal Cooperation, Ministry of Justice and Public Order Dominican Republic National Council for Children and Adolescents (CONANI) Finland Ministry of Justice France Ministère de l'Europe et des Affaires étrangères Direction des français à l'étranger et de l'administration consulaire - Service des conventions, des affaires civiles et de l'entraide judiciaire Mission de la protection des droits des personnes - Bureau du recouvrement des créances alimentaires à l'étranger Germany (CA) Bundesamt für Justiz/ Federal Office of Justice (Central Authority) Germany (DIJUF) German Institute for Youth Human Services and Family Law Hungary Ministry of Justice Department of Private International Law Latvia The Administration of the Maintenance Guarantee Fund (Uzturedzeku garantiju fonda administricija) Lithuania Mazeikiai division of the State Social Insurance Fund Board Luxembourg Procureur général d'Etat Mexico Consultoría Jurídica Netherlands LBIO Nicaragua Ministerio de la Familia, Adolescencia y Niñez Norway Directorate of Labour and Welfare Poland Requesting State - 45 Regional Courts, Requested State - The Ministry of Justice of Republic of Poland Portugal Central Authority of Portugal / Direção-Geral da Administração da Justiça - Divisão de Cooperação Judiciária Internacional Romania Ministry of Justice Slovenia Public Scholarship, Development, Disability and Maintenance Fund of the Republic of Slovenia Sweden Försäkringskassan(Swedish Social Insurance Agency) Switzerland Autorité centrale en matière de recouvrement international d'aliments Ukraine Ministry of Justice United Kingdom (England) Reciprocal Enforcements of Maintenance Orders (REMOs) Unit 3 United States of America United States Central Authority for International Child Support Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) Telephone number: Argentina 54 11 5300 4000 interno 76425, 78516 Australia +61 3 623 61135 Austria +43 (0)1 52152 0 Belarus +375 17 200 86 87, +375 17 211 01 85 Brazil 55 61 2025-8933 Bulgaria + 359 2 9237 469 Canada 613-952-3724 / 613-954-4320 Chile (1956 New York +562 29371435 // +569 92751311 Convention) Colombia (1956 New York Convention) Croatia 38515557111 Cyprus +35722805932 / 973/ 928 Dominican Republic 809-567-2233 Finland +358 9 1606 7628 France (33) 1 43 17 90 01 Germany (CA) Germany (DIJUF) 49-6221-9818-0 Hungary +36 1 795 4990 Latvia (+371)67830626 Lithuania 37044326659 Luxembourg +352 47 59 81-393 Mexico 36865100 Ext. 5314 / 5306 Netherlands 010-2894890 Nicaragua 505 - 22781620 ext. 171 Norway +47 95 77 14 06 Poland 222390470 Portugal +351 217906345 Romania 40372041077 4 Slovenia +386 1 4720 990 Sweden 010-112 04 58 Switzerland +41 58 46 31229 Ukraine +38 044 478 11 76 United Kingdom (England) +44 (0) 20 3681 2727 United States of America 202-401-5722 E-mail address: Argentina [email protected] [email protected] Australia [email protected] Austria [email protected] Belarus [email protected], [email protected] Brazil [email protected] Bulgaria [email protected] Canada [email protected]; [email protected] Chile (1956 New York [email protected] // [email protected] Convention) Colombia (1956 New York Convention) Croatia [email protected] Cyprus [email protected], [email protected] Dominican Republic [email protected] Finland [email protected] France [email protected] Germany (CA) [email protected] Germany (DIJUF) [email protected] Hungary [email protected] Latvia [email protected] Lithuania [email protected] Luxembourg [email protected] Mexico [email protected] Netherlands [email protected] / [email protected] Nicaragua [email protected] 5 Norway [email protected] Poland [email protected] Portugal [email protected] Romania [email protected], [email protected] Slovenia [email protected] Sweden [email protected] Switzerland [email protected] Ukraine [email protected] United Kingdom (England) [email protected] United States of America [email protected] 1. Statistics under the 2007 Convention 1.1. How many active cases is your Central Authority handling at this moment under the 2007 Convention? Outgoing cases: Argentina Please insert text here Australia Please insert text here Austria No data Belarus 51 Brazil around 800 Bulgaria 0
Load more

Recommended publications
  • No. 7625 AUSTRIA, FEDERAL REPUBLIC of GERMANY
    No. 7625 AUSTRIA, FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY, FINLAND, FRANCE, GREECE, etc. Convention (with annex) abolishing the requirement of legalisation for foreign public documents. Opened for signature at The Hague, on 5 October 1961 Official texts: French and English. Registered by the Netherlands on 1 March 1965. AUTRICHE, RÉPUBLIQUE FÉDÉRALE D'ALLEMAGNE, FINLANDE, FRANCE, GRÈCE, etc. Convention (avec annexe) supprimant l'exigence de la léga lisation des actes publics étrangers. Ouverte à la signa ture à La Haye, le 5 octobre 1961 Textes officiels français et anglais. Enregistrée par les Pays-Bas le 1" mars 1965. 1965 Nations Unies Recueil des Traités 191 No. 7625. CONVENTION 1 ABOLISHING THE REQUIRE MENT OF LEGALISATION FOR FOREIGN PUBLIC DOCU MENTS. OPENED FOR SIGNATURE AT THE HAGUE, ON 5 OCTOBER 1961 The States signatory to the present Convention, Desiring to abolish the requirement of diplomatic or consular legalisation for foreign public documents, Have resolved to conclude a Convention to this effect and have agreed upon the following provisions : Article 1 The present Convention shall apply to public documents which have been executed in the territory of one contracting State and which have to be produced in the territory of another contracting State. For the purposes of the present Convention, the following are deemed© to be public documents : «) documents emanating from an authority or an official connected with the courts or tribunals of the State, including those emanating from a public prosecutor, a clerk of a court or a process server (huissier de justice] ; b) administrative documents ; c) notarial acts ; d) official certificates which are placed on documents signed by persons in their private capacity, such as official certificates recording the registration of a document or the fact that it was in existence on a certain date and official and notarial authen tications of signatures.
    [Show full text]
  • The French Constat: Discovering More Efficient Discovery by Robert Emerson
    The Constat 1 The French Constat: Discovering More Efficient Discovery By Robert Emerson In France and some other Civil Code nations, the constat is a written report relating facts likely to lead to legal consequences. This report, prepared by a legally trained huissier, may be either ordered by a judge or requested by an individual. The constat has no American counterpart, but there are immense benefits to introducing it into the American legal system. Introduction The profession exercised by French jurists known as huissiers de justice has no American equivalent and, fittingly, there is no simple English translation for the word huissier. According to Martin Weston, the Senior Translator at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, the only reasonably precise translation is “’court usher and bailiff,’ though either ‘court usher’ or ‘bailiff’ will usually suffice when the text is clearly referring to only one function or the other.”1 Therefore, the traditional English translation of “bailiff” is not necessarily comprehensive or exact to encompass the multiple roles that the huissiers de justice serve in the French legal system.2 This last function, the execution of constats (translated as “findings” from the French “constatations”), has no American counterpart,3 and its potential benefits if introduced into the American legal system are the focus of this Article. 1 MARTIN WESTON, AN ENGLISH READER’S GUIDE TO THE FRENCH LEGAL SYSTEM 107– 08 (2d ed. 1991)(citing O’Rooney, Notes on the Criminal Laws and Related Matters in Certain Countries, U.N. Office of Conference Services, English Section, n.d. (1962)).
    [Show full text]
  • Practical Handbook on the Operation of the Service Convention
    Practical Convention on the Operation Handbook of the Service s v Hague Conference on Private International Law Permanent Bureau Practical HandbookOnly Churchillplein 6b 2517 JW The Hague The Netherlands on the Operationer w+31 70 363 3303 Use +31 70 360 4867 of the Service [email protected] i www.hcch.net Convention c Official For e Only Use Official For Only Practical HandbookUse on the Operation of the Service Convention Official For Only Use Published by The Hague Conference on Private International Law Permanent Bureau Churchillplein 6b 2517 JW The Hague The Netherlands Official +31 70 363 3303 +31 70 360 4867 [email protected] www.hcch.net For © Hague Conference on Private International Law 2016 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying or recording, without the written permission of the Permanent Bureau of the Hague Conference. ISBN 978-94-90265-47-2 Published in The Hague, the Netherlands Foreword On the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the conclusion of the Hague Convention of 15 November 1965 on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters, it is my great pleasure to present this updated and expanded 4th edition of the Practical Handbook on the Operation of the Service Convention. Since the publication of the 3rd edition of this Handbook in 2006 (whichOnly I had the pleasure to prepare with the assistance of Ms Laurence Thébault), there have been important developments in case law and State practice in relation to the Hague Service Convention.
    [Show full text]
  • HANDBOOK English for Judicial Cooperation in Civil Matters
    Linguistics Linguistque HANDBOOK English for Judicial Cooperation in Civil Matters With financial support from the Justice Programme of the European Union Avec le soutien financier du Programme Justice de l’Union européenne 3 Copyright Note This Handbook has been compiled solely for educational purposes. All the texts and materials included in this Handbook, except where otherwise stated, are the exclusive Property of the European Judicial Training Network (EJTN). Absolutely no reproduction of the contents of this Handbook, in whole or in part, may be made without the express written permission of EJTN. Extracts of the Handbook may be reviewed, reproduced or translated for private study only. This excludes sale or any other use in conjunction with a commercial purpose. Any public legal use or reference to the Handbook should be accompanied by an acknowledgment of EJTN as the source and by a mention of the author of the text referred to. Disclaimer The contents and views expressed herein reflect only those of EJTN and the European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of these contents and views. Edition 2016 Linguistics Linguistque European Judicial Training Network Réseau européen de formation judiciaire With financial support from the Justice Programme of the European Union Avec le soutien financier du Programme Justice de l’Union européenne ISBN-NUMBER: 9789081999076 EAN: 9789081999076 3 Foreword of the EJTN’s Secretary General Mastering a foreign language and its legal terminology is important and should form part of the continu- ous training of legal practitioners. It is a precondition to effective contacts across Member States, which are in turn the cornerstone for judicial cooperation.
    [Show full text]
  • Cepej(2021)10
    Strasbourg, 23 June 2021 CEPEJ(2021)10 EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR THE EFFICENCY OF JUSTICE (CEPEJ) 36th plenary meeting Strasbourg, 16 and 17 June 2021 (on-line meeting) Abridged report A) FOREWORD The European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) of the Council of Europe held its 36th online plenary meeting on 16 and 17 June 2021. The meeting was chaired by Mr Ramin GARAGURBANLI (Azerbaijan), President of the CEPEJ. The Director of Human Rights, Mr Christophe POIREL recalled the challenges and principal work to be examined during this meeting and introduced Mr Mikhail LOBOV, Head of the Department for the Implementation of Human Rights, Justice and Legal Co-operation Standards, within which the CEPEJ will henceforth be integrated. The agenda and the list of participants appear as appendices. B) LIST OF ITEMS DISCUSSED AND DECISIONS TAKEN BY THE CEPEJ The CEPEJ: 1. Quality of justice • decided to postpone the adoption of the roadmap for the establishment of a certification mechanism for artificial intelligence tools and services in the legal and judicial field to the next CEPEJ plenary meeting on 8 December and instructs the CEPEJ Bureau and its Working Group on Quality of Justice (CEPEJ-GT- QUAL) to refine the document, in light of the discussions with the other partners working on artificial intelligence, and in particular the European Commission concerning the proposal for a regulation on harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (COM(2021)206 final); • adopted the document for a better integration of the user in the judicial
    [Show full text]
  • Manuel Pratique Sur Le Fonctionnement De La Convention Notification (Projet Révisé)
    NOTIFICATION / PREUVES / ACCÈS À LA JUSTICE SERVICE / EVIDENCE / ACCESS TO JUSTICE Doc. prél. No 2 Prel. Doc. No 2 mai / May 2014 (Édition provisoire dans l’attente de l’achèvement de la version française / Provisional edition pending completion of the French version) MANUEL PRATIQUE SUR LE FONCTIONNEMENT DE LA CONVENTION NOTIFICATION (PROJET RÉVISÉ) établi par le Bureau Permanent * * * PRACTICAL HANDBOOK ON THE OPERATION OF THE SERVICE CONVENTION (DRAFT REVISED VERSION) drawn up by the Permanent Bureau Please note that the changes made to the current version of the Handbook are shown in mark-up Veuillez noter que la version actuelle du Manuel est présentée en suivi des modifications Document préliminaire No 2 de mai 2014 à l'attention de la Commission spéciale de mai 2014 sur le fonctionnement pratique des Conventions de La Haye Notification, Preuves et Accès à la Justice Preliminary Document No 2 of May 2014 for the attention of the Special Commission of May 2014 on the practical operation of the Hague Service, Evidence and Access to Justice Conventions Permanent Bureau | Bureau Permanent 6, Scheveningseweg 2517 KT The Hague | La Haye The Netherlands | Pays-Bas telephone | téléphone +31 (70) 363 3303 fax | télécopieur +31 (70) 360 4867 e-mail | courriel [email protected] website | site web http://www.hcch.net MANUEL PRATIQUE SUR LE FONCTIONNEMENT DE LA CONVENTION NOTIFICATION (PROJET RÉVISÉ) établi par le Bureau Permanent * * * PRACTICAL HANDBOOK ON THE OPERATION OF THE SERVICE CONVENTION (DRAFT REVISED VERSION) drawn up by the Permanent Bureau FOREWORD [to be updated] Forty years after its adoption, the Hague Convention of 15 November 1965 on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters remains an essential tool of international judicial cooperation and practice.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Cross-Border Secured Transactions
    Guide to Cross-Border Secured Transactions December 2013 Contents Introduction 1 Highlights and Recommendations 2 Country guides 11 Belarus 13 Belgium 17 Bulgaria 23 Chile 27 Colombia 31 Croatia 37 Czech Republic 41 England & Wales 45 Estonia 51 Finland 53 France 57 Germany 63 Hungary 67 Italy 73 Latvia 77 Lithuania 81 Luxembourg 85 The Netherlands 91 Poland 95 Romania 99 Russia 103 Serbia 107 Slovenia 111 Spain 117 Switzerland 123 Thailand 127 Ukraine 131 The right choice 135 Deloitte Legal's Services 136 Deloitte Legal's Capabilities 137 Introduction Dear Reader, In a globalized world, many companies engage daily in cross-border commercial transactions. This requires dealings to be structured in a manner that suitably manages risk. As this is commonly achieved via security agreements, familiarity with the specifics of cross-border taking and enforcing of security in various jurisdictions can help companies safely conduct businesses outside their home countries. To do this, companies need current, easy-to-use information relative to secured transactions in the jurisdictions where they do business. As a result, the Deloitte Legal Guide to Secured Transactions was produced by legal practices of the Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited member firms from 27 jurisdictions* across Europe, South America and South-East Asia. It was prepared based on research carried out during 2012-2013 in each of these jurisdictions, and includes country-specific information provided by local lawyers. This guide is intended to be a useful tool for creditors and
    [Show full text]
  • Manual on International Cooperation in Criminal Matters Related to Terrorism
    Vienna International Centre, PO Box 500, 1400 Vienna, Austria Tel: (+43-1) 26060-0, Fax: (+43-1) 26060-5565, www.unodc.org Manual on International Cooperation in Criminal Matters related to Terrorism FOR UNITED NATIONS USE ONLY *0856712* Printed in Austria V.08-55977—July 2009—1,000 UNITED NATIONS OFFICE ON DRUGS AND CRIME Vienna Manual on International Cooperation in Criminal Matters related to Terrorism UNITED NATIONS New York, 2009 Preface The Terrorism Prevention Branch of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), as mandated by the General Assembly, provides assistance to requesting countries in the legal and related aspects of counter-terrorism, especially for the purposes of ratifying and implementing the universal legal instruments against terrorism and strengthening the capacity of national criminal justice systems to apply the provisions of those instruments in compliance with the principles of the rule of law. In order to assist Member States in understanding the provisions contained in the universal instruments, drafting new legislation that complies with the requirements of the universal instruments and enhancing international cooperation in criminal matters relating to terrorism, UNODC has developed a number of technical assistance tools. One of these tools is the present Manual on International Cooperation in Criminal Matters related to Terrorism, which has been developed to enable legal practitioners specialized in the fight against terrorism to efficiently and speedily utilize international cooperation measures such as extradition and mutual legal assistance, as well as to give them practical advice concerning the difficulties and obstacles they may encounter. It can also serve as an educational tool to be used in the training of legal practitioners in the fight against terrorism.
    [Show full text]
  • Service of Claim Documents Within the Jurisdiction and Abroad Q&A: France
    Service of claim documents within the jurisdiction and..., Practical Law Country... Service of claim documents within the jurisdiction and abroad Q&A: France by Franck Poindessault and Antoine Beauquier, Boken Country Q&A | Law stated as at 31-Mar-2020 | France France-specific information setting out the framework for service of claim documents (in relation to domestic and foreign proceedings) within the jurisdiction, and service of claim documents outside the jurisdiction. Starting civil proceedings 1. How are civil proceedings commenced in your jurisdiction? Do the rules permit the filing of documents containing the details of claim electronically? Procedural formalities and documents to be filed in the court The claimant begins civil proceedings by serving the claim to the defendant. It is possible to begin civil proceedings by filing the claim with the court first. However, this is only possibly in specific circumstances, for example, in the case of a "procedure à jour fixé" for urgent matters where it is important to file with the court first. Rarely, it is possible to file a request directly with the court where the parties agree to appear before the judge and file a stipulated request. Under Article 56 of the Civil Procedure Code (Code de Procédure Civile) (CPC), there are certain terms and details that must be included in the claim, including some specific to the type of court presiding over the claim. The claim must state the competent court. Articles 752 and 855 of the CPC apply to the Tribunal Judiciaire and the Commercial Court (Tribunal de Commerce) respectively. The claimant must hire a huissier de justice (bailiff) to serve the claim on the defendant.
    [Show full text]
  • The French Constat: Discovering More Efficient Discovery
    EMERSON FINAL MACRO (DO NOT DELETE) 12/20/2017 1:00 PM THE FRENCH CONSTAT: DISCOVERING MORE EFFICIENT DISCOVERY Robert W. Emerson I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... 3 II. HUISSIER AND THEIR REPORTS .......................................................... 6 A. The Huissier Profession .............................................................. 6 1. Functions, Education, and Regulation................................... 6 2. A Negative Social Image ...................................................... 8 B. The Huissier’s Factfinding Report, the Constat ....................... 13 1. The Requirements of the Constat ........................................ 18 2. The Patent-Infringement Cousin of the Constat: The Saisie-Contrefaçon .............................................................. 22 III. ADOPTING THE CONSTAT: HOW AND WHY? .................................... 25 A. Inefficiency of the American Legal System as Compared to the French ................................................................................. 25 B. Inefficiency in the American Discovery Process ....................... 29 C. Benefits of Adopting the Constat ............................................... 30 D. Adapting the Constat: Uses and Limitations ............................ 32 1. Specific Uses of the Constat: Intellectual Property ............ 35 i. Trademark Infringement ............................................... 36 ii. Copyright Infringement ...............................................
    [Show full text]
  • PC-OC (2013) 01 Rev
    http://www.coe.int/tcj Strasbourg, 13 May 2013 PC-OC (2013) 01 rev. Bil. [PC-OC/Docs 2013/ PC-OC(2013)1rev.] EUROPEAN COMMITTEE ON CRIME PROBLEMS (CDPC) COMITE EUROPEEN POUR LES PROBLEMES CRIMINELS (CDPC) COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS ON THE OPERATION OF EUROPEAN CONVENTIONS ON CO-OPERATION IN CRIMINAL MATTERS (PC-OC) COMITE D'EXPERTS SUR LE FONCTIONNEMENT DES CONVENTIONS EUROPEENNES SUR LA COOPERATION DANS LE DOMAINE PENAL (PC-OC) Questionnaire concerning judgments in absentia and the possibility of retrial Summary and Compilation of Replies Questionnaire concernant les jugements par défaut et la possibilité d'être rejugé Résumé et compilation des réponses Replies received from: Albania, Armenia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Malta, the Republic of Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Serbia, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom PC-OC (2013) 01rev 2 Contents/ Table des matières Introduction (English).......................................................................................................................4 Summary of replies to the questionnaire.........................................................................................6 Introduction (français) ....................................................................................................................11 Synthèse
    [Show full text]
  • The French Huissier As a Model for U.S. Civil Procedure Reform
    University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Volume 43 2010 The French Huissier as a Model for U.S. Civil Procedure Reform Robert W. Emerson Warrington College of Business Administration, University of Florida Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjlr Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Courts Commons, Evidence Commons, and the Litigation Commons Recommended Citation Robert W. Emerson, The French Huissier as a Model for U.S. Civil Procedure Reform, 43 U. MICH. J. L. REFORM 1043 (2010). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjlr/vol43/iss4/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE FRENCH HUISSIER AS A MODEL FOR U.S. CIVIL PROCEDURE REFORM Robert W. Emerson* Huissiers dejustice serve multiple roles in the French legal system. One is that of a court officer who compiles dossiers (reports). In that role, the huissier is d'audiencier (literally translated as "hearing"or "assisting")and works directly for the court system itself The huissier's report remains alien to the American lawyer, who is steeped in no- tions of procedure and "testimonialism" and in principles of fairness which appear ancient, but are rather modern dissimulations of law and equity's rich his- tory in the American tradition.
    [Show full text]