DOCSLIB.ORG

Competition Litigation 2021

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Competition Litigation 2021 Competition Litigation 2021 A practical cross-border insight into competition litigation work 13th Edition Featuring contributions from: Advokatfirmaet Sune Troels Poulsen Economic Insight Limited Ledesma Uribe y Rodriguez Rivero S.C. Advokatfirmaet Thommessen AS Gall Nagashima Ohno & Tsunematsu Ashurst LLP Galvez Pascual Osborne Clarke Barun Law LLC Hausfeld & Co. LLP Pinheiro Neto Advogados DALDEWOLF Haver & Mailänder Rechtsanwälte Preslmayr Rechtsanwälte OG DDPV Studio Legale Partnerschaft mbB Shearman & Sterling LLP Dittmar & Indrenius Honoré & Fallesen Law Firm Stewarts ISBN 978-1-83918-071-2 ISSN 1757-2819 Published by 59 Tanner Street London SE1 3PL United Kingdom Competition Litigation 2021 +44 207 367 0720 [email protected] th www.iclg.com 13 Edition Consulting Group Publisher Rory Smith Publisher Oliver Smith Editor Contributing Editor: Amy Norton Euan Burrows Senior Editor Sam Friend Ashurst LLP Head of Production Suzie Levy Chief Media Officer Fraser Allan CEO Jason Byles Printed by Ashford Colour Press Ltd. Cover image www.istockphoto.com ©2020 Global Legal Group Limited. All rights reserved. Unauthorised reproduction by any means, Strategic Partners digital or analogue, in whole or in part, is strictly forbidden. Disclaimer This publication is for general information purposes only. It does not purport to provide comprehen- sive full legal or other advice. Global Legal Group Ltd. and the contributors accept no responsibility for losses that may arise from reliance upon information contained in this publication. This publication is intended to give an indication of legal issues upon which you may need advice. Full legal advice should be taken from a qualified professional when dealing with specific situations. Table of Contents Expert Chapters To Shop or Not to Shop?: Jurisdictional Differences Following Implementation of the Damages Directive 1 Euan Burrows & Emile Abdul-Wahab, Ashurst LLP Leading by Example: A Case of Effective Private Enforcement in England and Wales 16 Scott Campbell & Luke Grimes, Hausfeld & Co. LLP Every Little Helps: Calculating Interest in Consumer Claims 22 Christopher Pickard & James Harvey, Economic Insight Limited Recovering Cartel Damages in England – A Claimant’s Guide 27 Kate Pollock & Leah Keen, Stewarts Q&A Chapters Austria Hong Kong 34 Preslmayr Rechtsanwälte OG: Mag. Dieter Hauck 106 Gall: Nick Dealy & Ashima Sood Belgium Italy 44 DALDEWOLF: Thierry Bontinck, Pierre Goffinet & 114 DDPV Studio Legale: Luciano Vasques & Laure Bersou Chiara Sciarra Brazil Japan 52 Pinheiro Neto Advogados: Leonardo Rocha e Silva & 124 Nagashima Ohno & Tsunematsu: Koki Yanagisawa Alessandro P. Giacaglia Korea Denmark 132 Barun Law LLC: Gwang Hyeon Baek & 58 Honoré & Fallesen Law Firm: Michael Honoré & Seung Jae Jeon Asbjørn Godsk Fallesen Advokatfirmaet Sune Troels Poulsen: Sune Troels Mexico 138 Poulsen Ledesma Uribe y Rodriguez Rivero S.C.: Claudia de los Ríos Olascoaga & Bernardo Carlos England & Wales Ledesma Uribe 66 Ashurst LLP: James Levy, Max Strasberg & Helen Chamberlain Netherlands 144 Osborne Clarke: Steven Verschuur & Jeroen Bedaux Finland 83 Norway Dittmar & Indrenius: Ilkka Leppihalme & 151 Toni Kalliokoski Advokatfirmaet Thommessen AS: Siri Teigum, Eivind J Vesterkjær & Heidi Jorkjend France 90 Spain Osborne Clarke SELAS: Alexandre Glatz & 158 Thibaut Marcerou Galvez Pascual: Josep Galvez, Maximilian O’Driscoll & Ander Garcia Germany 98 Haver & Mailänder Rechtsanwälte Partnerschaft mbB: USA 169 Prof. Dr. Ulrich Schnelle & Elisabeth S. Wyrembek Shearman & Sterling LLP: Todd M. Stenerson, David A. Higbee & Rachel E. Mossman Welcome From the Publisher Dear Reader, Welcome to the 13th edition of ICLG – Competition Litigation, published by Global Legal Group. This publication provides corporate counsel and international practitioners with comprehensive jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction guidance to competition litigation laws and regulations around the world, and is also available at www.iclg.com. This year, four expert chapters cover the implementation of the Damages Directive as well as private enforcement, interest in consumer claims and cartel damages. The question and answer chapters, which in this edition cover 17 jurisdictions, provide detailed answers to common questions raised by professionals dealing with competi- tion law. As always, this publication has been written by leading competition lawyers and industry specialists, for whose invaluable contributions the editors and publishers are extremely grateful. Global Legal Group would also like to extend special thanks to contributing editor Euan Burrows of Ashurst LLP for his leadership, support and expertise in bringing this project to fruition. Rory Smith Consulting Group Publisher Global Legal Group Welcome Chapter 1 1 To Shop or Not to Shop?: Jurisdictional Differences Following Implementation of Euan Burrows the Damages Directive Ashurst LLP Emile Abdul-Wahab Introduction In contrast, national measures adopted to comply with any other provisions of the Directive (i.e. those relating to procedure) may When the EU Directive on antitrust damages actions (the have limited retroactive effect, but shall not apply to actions “Directive”)1 was adopted on 26 November 2014, its stated aim for damages of which a national court was seized prior to 26 was to ensure “a more level playing field for undertakings operating in December 2014. the internal market and to improve conditions for consumers to exercise the However, the Directive does not provide further specifica- rights they derive from the internal market […] and to reduce the differ- tion on when national implementing legislation should enter ences between the Member States as to the national rules governing actions into force, or, rather unhelpfully, which of its provisions should for damages [for competition law infringements]”.2 It was widely be treated as substantive and which as procedural for these acknowledged at the time that this was a laudable but very ambi- purposes. Whilst the distinction will often be obvious, this is tious aim, given the mixture of common and civil law systems not always the case, in particular in relation to the key issue of in place across EU Member States, and the differing levels of limitation periods. private enforcement to date. As a result, it was left open to Member States to take differing Whilst all Member States have implemented the Directive approaches to the question of temporal application of national into national law as of 6 June 2018,3 it is still too early to tell implementing legislation and the distinction between proce- whether the Directive will ultimately achieve its stated aim. dural and substantive provisions, and this is indeed what has However, a comparative review of the implementing legisla- happened in practice. For example: tion adopted in different Member States indicates that, even to (a) in the UK, none of the provisions adopted to comply with the extent that the Directive establishes similar basic rules on the Directive apply to proceedings brought prior to 9 matters such as disclosure and limitation periods, the widely March 2017 (when the national implementing regulations differing approaches taken to the question of temporal appli- entered into force4). In addition, substantive provisions cation (i.e. when the new rules will apply) mean that it is likely (expressly specified in the UK implementing regulations, to be a number of years before we see any significant degree of and including all amendments to limitation periods) only harmonisation. In the meantime, the complexity of determining apply where the infringement and harm to which the claim exactly which substantive and procedural rules will apply to a relates also occurred on or after 9 March 2017; competition law claim in any given Member State remains high. (b) in the Netherlands, measures relating to non-substantive Moreover, given that the Directive only sets out minimum provisions (deemed to include new or amended measures requirements, and does not cover certain key issues such as in relation to requesting assistance of the Dutch national the possibility of collective actions, the availability of interim competition authority (“NCA”) in the quantification of injunctions in stand-alone private actions, or crucial practical loss, the prescribed binding nature of an irrevocable deci- matters such as costs and funding, significant differences are sion of the Dutch NCA, disclosure applications and appli- likely to remain between private enforcement regimes across the cations or decisions for a stay of proceedings for out-of- EU even once the implementation of the Directive takes full court dispute resolution) do not apply to actions for effect. As a result, the choice of jurisdiction (where available) damages of which a Dutch court was seized prior to 26 seems likely to continue to be a key strategic question for both December 2014. Measures relating to substantive provi- defendants and claimants (and their legal advisors). sions are stated to apply with effect from 10 February 2017 This chapter considers the approach to implementation taken (when the national implementing legislation entered into in the UK, the Netherlands, Germany, France and Spain, high- force5) with no retroactive effect, but it remains unclear lighting the key differences between the new regimes and the whether this will be interpreted to mean that it is suffi- likely future impact on antitrust damages actions. It also briefly cient that proceedings have been commenced on or after considers
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ashurst A4 Marketing Flyer
    Privilege AUSTRALIA BELGIUM CHINA FRANCE GERMANY HONG KONG SAR INDONESIA (ASSOCIATED OFFICE) ITALY JAPAN PAPUA NEW GUINEA SAUDI ARABIA SINGAPORE SPAIN SWEDEN UNITED ARAB EMIRATES UNITED KINGDOM UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Privilege This guide provides an overview of the principles governing the ability of a party to keep communications with its lawyer confidential under the English law of privilege. It reviews the main heads of privilege which can be claimed, how privilege can be lost, and how to ensure that communications that are privileged, stay privileged. In particular, this guide covers: Legal professional privilege Legal advice privilege Litigation privilege Other heads of privilege Joint privilege Common interest privilege Without prejudice privilege Privilege against self-incrimination Duration of privilege Loss of privilege Preserving privilege The guide then goes on to look at privilege in practice and at the questions that frequently arise. It concludes with a table providing a brief overview of the categories of legal privilege. This publication is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Readers should take legal advice before applying the information contained in this publication to specific issues or transactions. For more information please contact us at Ashurst LLP, Broadwalk House, 5 Appold Street, London EC2A 2HA T: +44 (0)20 7638 1111 F: +44 (0)20 7638 1112 www.ashurst.com Ashurst LLP and its affiliates operate under the name Ashurst. Ashurst LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales under number OC330252. It is a law firm authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority of England and Wales under number 468653.
    [Show full text]
  • The Use of Management Consultants by the NHS and the Department of Health
    House of Commons Health Committee The use of management consultants by the NHS and the Department of Health Fifth Report of Session 2008–09 Report, together with formal minutes and oral evidence Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 30 April 2009 HC 28 [Incorporating HC 28-i and 340-i] Published on 4 June 2009 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £14.50 The Health Committee The Health Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Department of Health and its associated bodies. Current membership Rt Hon Kevin Barron MP (Labour, Rother Valley) (Chairman) Charlotte Atkins MP (Labour, Staffordshire Moorlands) Mr Peter Bone MP (Conservative, Wellingborough) Jim Dowd MP (Labour, Lewisham West) Sandra Gidley MP (Liberal Democrat, Romsey) Stephen Hesford MP (Labour, Wirral West) Dr Doug Naysmith MP (Labour, Bristol North West) Mr Lee Scott MP (Conservative, Ilford North) Dr Howard Stoate MP (Labour, Dartford) Mr Robert Syms MP (Conservative, Poole) Dr Richard Taylor MP (Independent, Wyre Forest) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/healthcom Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Dr David Harrison (Clerk), Adrian Jenner (Second Clerk), Laura Daniels (Committee Specialist), David Turner (Committee Specialist), Frances Allingham (Senior Committee Assistant), Julie Storey (Committee Assistant) and Gabrielle Henderson (Committee Support Assistant).
    [Show full text]
  • Time for Law Firms to Embrace Change 04 10 18
    INDEPENDENT PUBLICATION BY raconteur.net #0387 29 / 06 / 2016 LEGAL INNOVATION TIME FOR LAW FIRMS ROBOT LAWYERS AND LAW FIRMS MUST GET LITIGATION HAS VALUE 04 VIRTUAL ASSISTANTS 10 DOWN TO BUSINESS 18 WORTH INVESTMENT 03 TO EMBRACE CHANGE Artificial intelligence offers law Management efficiencies for There’s a new source of finance UK lawyers face uncertain times as legal aid and fees are squeezed firms a business opportunity a more professional approach to fund law suits and justice RACONTEUR 29 / 06 / 2016 raconteur.net LEGAL INNOVATION 03 Getty Images LEGAL INNOVATION DISTRIBUTED IN RACONTEUR PUBLISHING MANAGER HEAD OF PRODUCTION Marcus Pemberton Natalia Rosek PRODUCTION EDITOR DIGITAL CONTENT MANAGER Benjamin Chiou Sarah Allidina MANAGING EDITOR DESIGN Peter Archer Samuele Motta Grant Chapman Kellie Jerrard It’s time for law firms CONTRIBUTORS to embrace change JONATHAN AMES CATHERINE BAKSI Legal affairs reporter for Former barrister and The Times, he is editor Law Society Gazette Despite increasing numbers, lawyers in the UK face uncertain of the newspaper’s daily reporter, she is a freelance law bulletin The Brief. journalist writing for a times as legal aid and fees are squeezed, and alternative firms broad range of law titles. owned by non-lawyers provide competition ALISON COLEMAN EDWARD FENNELL Writer and editor, she is a Award-winning specialist contributor to Forbes, The writer on business law Guardian, Director, Economia and the legal industry, and Employee Benefits. he is a regular contributor OVERVIEW Of that group of 150,000 lawyers, ing – whether to offshore providers So will it all burst with a loud to The Times.
    [Show full text]
  • Nestle Amicus Brief.October.19.2020
    ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Nos. 19-416 & 19-453 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES NESTLÉ USA, INC., Petitioner, v. JOHN DOE I, et al., Respondents. __________ CARGILL, INC., Petitioner, v. JOHN DOE I, et al., Respondents. On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit BRIEF OF FOREIGN LAWYERS AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS Tanya Sukhija-Cohen William J. Aceves Hadsell Stormer Renick Counsel of Record & Dai LLP California Western School 128 North Fair Oaks Ave. of Law Pasadena, CA 91103 225 Cedar Street (626) 585-9600 San Diego, CA 92101 [email protected] (619) 515-1589 [email protected] Counsel for Amici Curiae ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................... i TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................................. iii INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE ............................ 1 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ................................ 1 ARGUMENT ........................................................... 3 I. INTERNATIONAL LAW ALLOWS STATES TO EXERCISE JURISDICTION OVER THEIR CITIZENS, INCLUDING CORPORATIONS, REGARDLESS OF WHERE THEY OPERATE .......................... 3 II. FOREIGN STATES ROUTINELY ASSERT JURISDICTION OVER DOMESTIC CORPORATIONS REGARDLESS OF WHERE THEY OPERATE .......................... 9 A. AUSTRALIA ............................................ 9 B. CANADA ................................................ 15 C. ENGLAND & WALES ........................... 21 D. FRANCE ................................................ 25 E. GERMANY
    [Show full text]
  • Addleshaw Goddard Hong Kong Training Contract
    Addleshaw Goddard Hong Kong Training Contract politicizesJotham volatilize very allopathically. irrelevantly ifFowler equipotent barricadoes Stacy pup off-the-record. or overtook. Lozenged Humphrey queers her knurs so extrinsically that Lincoln Y Law enforcement training facility successfully protests U Constitution the law field said. Addleshaw Goddard has appointed David Kirchin as worth of Scotland for software firm. Burges Salmon Osborne Clarke and Addleshaw Goddard have advised. Lawyer salary Which training contracts pay the benefit The Tab. Csr events for hong kong high in addleshaw goddard hong kong training contract for hong kong the addleshaw goddard, employment are an indonesian local and try again or go through an application stands out and! Department who State's vegetable of marital contract for training and exportation of. Can be in hong kong and train in the contracts and communications; it is always adequately equipped, enabling push them. Tokyo hong kong beijing melbourne sydney Sullivan Cromwell. Each year research firm receives around 2000 vacation advice and direct training contract applications combined At said initial application stage an HR source tells us. Ashurst News Analysis and Updates Page 1 of 25 Legal. CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang and Addleshaw Goddard are among. Ropes Gray has launched its debut Tokyo training contract program in. Salary London 400 pw Salary Hong Kong 2500 HKD pw Location London. 23 Norton Rose Fulbright Addleshaw Goddard Mishcon de Reya and HFW. Giles qualified as a solicitor with Addleshaw Goddard in Manchester and. Lawyers from the Hong Kong offices of Clifford Chance Herbert Smith. Dec 03 2020 Applying for a training contract at Gowling WLG.
    [Show full text]
  • Developing Employees for International Success Ashurt
    Developing Employees for International Success Ashurt Ashurst LLP is an elite law firm with over 400 partners and 1,700 lawyers operating from 25 offices in 14 countries. Ashurst advises corporates, financial institutions and governments, with core businesses in corporate, finance, energy, resources and infrastructure. Communicaid Communicaid is a global culture and communication skills consultancy that assists the world’s leading organisations to mitigate the risks and maximise the opportunities of working in a complex and ever-changing international environment. We work with international organisations such as Ashurst to provide a complete suite of consultancy services as well as targeted intercultural, language and communication skills training. Developing Employees Ashurst Employees for International Success Each year, Ashurst recruits approximately 55 graduates for training contracts, and many, as part of their two-year traineeship, will undertake a six-month seat in an overseas office. Ashurst recognised the need to prepare employees for these international postings by providing pre-departure language and intercultural training. By partnering with Communicaid, the firm provides intensive language training for assignees posted to Paris, Frankfurt, Madrid and Milan. Intercultural training is offered to those assignees sent to Dubai, Singapore and Tokyo. Training Objectives working styles tailored to the • Prepare employees employees’ existing skills The key objectives of this for the practicalities of and experience training initiative
    [Show full text]
  • 19 December 2018 Dear Member Evening Meeting at Bristows LLP
    www.competitionlawassociation.org.uk www.ligue.org 19 December 2018 Dear Member Evening Meeting at Bristows LLP: Tuesday 15 January, 2019 at 6.00 pm The CLA will be holding an evening meeting on Tuesday 15 January at Bristows LLP, 100 Victoria Embankment, London EC4Y 0DH. Registration for the event will start at 6pm followed by the talk and opportunity for discussion at 6:15pm. David Rosenberg and Darren Smyth have kindly agreed to speak on the following subject: “Lyrica in the Supreme Court: broader lessons for pharmaceuticals” There was much excitement surrounding the Supreme Court’s judgment in November on Pfizer’s second medical use patent for Pregabalin for pain (Pfizer’s blockbuster Lyrica drug). Now that the dust has settled, we will discuss the broader implications for the pharmaceutical sector and the competitive framework for drugs with both patented and unpatented uses. David Rosenberg is a solicitor and, until the end of the year, is Vice President IP Policy at GlaxoSmithKline. Before he joined GSK in 2000, he was in the IP department at a major City law firm. Since then, he has handled GSK external IP policy work and been deeply involved in such matters as work on access to medicines and the UPC. He sits on many trade associations and chairs the IP committee of EFPIA (the European innovative pharmaceutical trade association). He was deeply involved in the European Commission Sector Inquiry into the Pharmaceutical Industry. Darren Smyth is a UK and European Patent Attorney and is the head of EIP's chemistry practice group EIP Elements.
    [Show full text]
  • National Programmes in a Global Pro Bono Practice
    4th Asia Pro Bono Conference 2015 National Programs in a Global Pro Bono Practice Speakers • Facilitator – Lynn McMahon, Herbert Smith Freehills • Co-Presenters – Sarah Morton-Ramwell, Ashurst – Katie Sweatman, K&L Gates Lynn McMahon Herbert Smith Freehills Lynn McMahon is a full-time Pro Bono Senior Associate in the Sydney office of HSF where she is involved in the management of the firm’s pro bono program in 12 offices across Australia and Asia. Lynn has over 15 years’ experience as a dispute resolution lawyer and worked on a broad range of commercial matters in Australia at HSF and in London at Linklaters. During her time at both firms she provided pro bono legal advice to a diverse range of pro bono clients. She also worked as an advocate for disadvantaged young people at the Shopfront Youth Legal Centre in Sydney. Lynn is also a member of the HSF Community Committee responsible for management of the firm’s community and charitable engagement. Lynn was involved in the development of the BABSEA CLE Ethics and Professional Responsibility Curriculum (which she has co-presented in Cambodia) and the Mock Trial Curriculum. She is a member of the International Organising Committee and Program Committee for this Conference. Sarah Morton-Ramwell Ashurst LLP Sarah is a partner and global head of pro bono at Ashurst. With a background in human right law, gender rights and reproductive rights, she works full time in pro bono. During her time in the nonprofit sector, Sarah worked at the Center of Reproductive Rights in New York and International Planned Parenthood Federation in London.
    [Show full text]
  • Ashurst London Training Contract
    Ashurst London Training Contract Which Bengt reliving so fuliginously that Fergus devolving her tufters? Jerald bowsed his follow-ons shambling rustily, but new-made Sig never entraps so itinerantly. Overthrown Cosmo machine: he beware his inulas brainlessly and atypically. Indeed and all of the london training His real estate department during their insights into each role models, work for a teacher? Cmi includes cookies that a hole in either during lockdown, as welcome news coverage we bring to a nice way to sevento hr step in. How well as well as they are you will be exposed to london and offering. Christmas social value or two vacation schemes, so people from the new approach in the recipient of sectors in singapore, the hours count towards billable hours? Trainees to london, plenty of railways operating officer and contract at an account with the deals. The ashurst will be clear and find contact, with housing management, ashurst london training contract deadlines? It training contract is ashurst is open communication skills sessions on anything. Manchester trainees in expectations of due diligence reports by employer or pass and families are chosen on! English law firm ashurst interview was a training contract application for london, people are encouraged to deliver an effective lawyer in line of ashurst london training contract at my answers to reliance bank. Trainees must go beyond just practice groups also diverse. Beyond technical knowledge depending on large insurers was doing something about themselves on training contract kicks off steam at an invitation within ashurst employees moving in. Lunchtimes instead expect to training contract termination cases and final one of extra hours can apply for success launching the area of specialist recruiter jobs.
    [Show full text]
  • Just and Accountable Development
    Just and Accountable Development 2014 Annual Report & 2015 Review 38 COUNTRIES ISLP at Work 3 170 PROJECTS Letter from the Co-Presidents 4 Letter from the Executive Director 5 Natural Resources 6 Vulnerable Communities 6 Case Study: Kenya’s Kerio Valley 7 Investment, Trade & Tax 8 Economic & Social Development 8 Case Study: Liberia Boosts Small Businesses 9 Strengthening Media Freedoms 10 Supporting Civil Society 11 Law Firms and Barristers’ 57 Chambers Partnerships 12 LAW FIRMS Awards & Publications 12 Volunteers 13 10 LANGUAGES Donors 14 Financial Statements 14 Board of Directors and Staff 15 22,000 Law Firm Donors 16 PRO BONO HOURS 2 A GLOBAL IMPACT ISLP at Work ISLP’s mission is to foster just and accountable development which is sustainable, supportive of human rights, and strengthens the rule of law, by mobilizing our unique network of highly skilled and experienced pro bono lawyers to advise civil society and governments. NATURAL VULNERABLE CIVIL SOCIETY 25 RESOURCES COMMUNITIES SPACE COUNTRIES WITH ONSITE MISSIONS ECONOMIC ANTI- INVESTMENT, & SOCIAL CORRUPTION TRADE & TAX $9.5m DEVELOPMENT IN DONATED SERVICES 3 LETTERS Letter from the “ We cannot thank enough those of our many friends for generously Letter from the providing the financial, service, and moral support to permit us to Co-Presidents realize our dream.” Co-Presidents Dear Friends, would have worked in some 60 countries in sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, Asia, Latin America, and Eastern Europe; and that we would have a widely–recognized record As the 2014 Annual Report goes to press, ISLP has completed a comprehensive strategic of significant accomplishment.
    [Show full text]
  • 1923 Geneva Protocol on Arbitration Clauses, 120 1952 Arrest Convention, 134, 135 EU Rules, 141 Exclusions, 136 Recognition
    2731 Index 1923 Geneva Protocol on Arbitration Anti- suit injunctions, 83, 84, 85 Clauses, 120 Forum non conveniens, 798, 800, 802, 803, 804, 1952 Arrest Convention, 134, 135 805 EU rules, 141 Injunction, 928 Exclusions, 136 Legal aid, 1088 Recognition and enforcement of foreign Mediation, 1250 judgments, 139 Online dispute resolution, 1314 Scope of application, 135 Public international law and private international Substantive rules, 136 law, 1451 1993 Maritime Liens and Mortgages Service of documents, 1628 Convention, 134 Accessory connecting factors, 34, 448 1999 Arrest Convention, 134 Culpa in contrahendo, 495 EU rules, 140 Renvoi, 1544 Exclusions, 136 Accessory connection Flag, 136 Connecting factor, 448 Jurisdiction, foundations, 139 Negotiorum gestio, 1303 Liability of owner, 137 Prescription, 1371 Party autonomy, 139 Torts, 1712, 1714 Recognition and enforcement of foreign Unjust enrichment (restitution), 1811 judgments, 139 Accident Scope of application, 135 Carriage of passengers, 271, 274, 275, 276 Substantive rules, 136 Accident compensation New Zealand, 2374 Absence Accidents at sea Absence (disappearance, presumed Maritime torts, 1220 death) 1, 2, 3, 4 Account Preservation Order Regulation Brussels I (Convention and Regulation), 4 Brussels I (Convention and Regulation), 225 China, 3 Civil and commercial matters, 348 Concept, 1 Account- payee- only cheques, 296 Connecting factor, 4 Account Preservation Order Regulation Domicile, habitual residence and establishment, 3, Attachment of bank accounts, 681 5 Accursius Function,
    [Show full text]
  • Lungowe and Others V Vedanta Resources Plc and Another (International Commission of Jurists and Others Intervening)
    1051 [2019] 2 WLR Lungowe v Vedanta Resources plc (SC(E))(SC(E)) A Supreme Court Lungowe and others v Vedanta Resources plc and another (International Commission of Jurists and others intervening) [2019] UKSC 20 B 2019 Jan 15, 16; Baroness Hale of Richmond PSC, Lord Wilson, April 10 Lord Hodge, Lady Black, Lord Briggs JSC Conict of laws Ñ Jurisdiction under European Union Regulation Ñ Forum non conveniens Ñ Claimants claims against defendants domiciled in United Kingdom and Zambia respectively Ñ English courts having jursidiction under Regulation in respect of United Kingdom defendant Ñ Whether courts having C discretion to decline jurisdiction in favour of Zambian courts Ñ Parliament and Council Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, art 4 Practice Ñ Claim form Ñ Service out of jurisdiction Ñ Claimants claims against defendants domiciled in United Kingdom and Zambia respectively Ñ Claimants granted permission to serve claim form on Zambian defendant out of jurisdiction Ñ Whether Ôreal issueÕ between claimants and United Kingdom defendant to which Zambian defendant necessary and proper party Ñ Whether England D Ôproper placeÕ for hearing claim Ñ Whether claimants able to achieve substantial justice if claim heard in Zambia Ñ CPR rr 6.36, 6.37(3), Practice Direction 6B, para 3.1 The claimants, Zambian citizens living in Zambia, brought claims in negligence against the defendants, a United Kingdom company and its Zambian subsidiary, alleging personal injury, damage to property and loss of income, amenity and E enjoyment of land due to pollution and environmental damage caused by discharges from a Zambian copper mine which was owned and operated by the second defendant subsidiary.
    [Show full text]