The EFFORTS Project in brief
Embracing a practice driven approach, a consortium of experts in international procedural law will analyse the existing legislation and case-law of the 7 targeted Member States (Belgium, Croatia, France, Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg), promote the exchange of practices among operators (at 7 seminars) and collect good practices, with regards to the interaction of EU Regulations on circulation of judicial decisions and national legislation.
The consortium will: pursue clarity by means of 7 Practice Guides on cross-border recovery of claims in the targeted Member States – contribute to the improvement of existing EU and national legislation by drafting Policy recommendations for national and EU policymakers – setting up the EFFORTS Network and a Working Group on the digitalization of enforcement procedures.
About the Project: International exchange seminar
On 25 February 2022, the Max Planck Institute Luxembourg hosted, in collaboration with the Università degli Studi di Milano, the International exchange seminar of the EFFORTS Project. The IES gathered up to 105 participants (experts, academics and practitioners) from several Member States, promoting dialogue and exchanging experiences building from the results of the first year’s activities and publications: the seven Reports for the collection of implementing rules, the seven Reports on national case-law and the six National exchange seminars.
The IES has featured four thematic presentations addressing some of the most relevant issues uncovered by the Project to date: «Harmonizing Certification Procedures of Enforceable Titles within the EU: Challenges and Opportunities», Marco Buzzoni; «National Procedural Impediments to the Circulation of Judgments and Extrajudicial Titles», Dr. Michele Casi; «Circulation of Interim Measures within the EU», Carlos Santaló Goris; «Overlapping Instruments and Strategic Choices in Cross-Border Enforcement», Prof. Dr. Burkhard Hess. Each presentation has been followed by an engaged open discussion with the audience.
News on international, European and comparative civil procedural law
- T. Pfeiffer, Q. Lobach, Effektive grenzüberschreitende Vollstreckung in der Europäischen Union, Nomos, 2022, https://www.nomos-shop.de/nomos/titel/effektive-grenzueberschreitende-vollstreckung-in-der-europaeischen-union-id-102949/
English summary of contents: The volume addresses the Regulation on the European Enforcement Order, the Regulation on the European Small Claims Procedure, the European Order for Payment Regulation and the European Account Attachment Regulation. Rolf Wagner offers more detailed insights into the legal policy background of these legal acts. Johanna Richardt reports on the practical experience of the AG Wedding as the European Order for Payment Court for Germany with the Order for Payment Regulation, while Robert Magnus looks at the European order for payment procedure from an academic perspective. Wolfgang Hau deals with the European procedure for small claims. Finally, the European Account Attachment Regulation is examined by Peter Kreutz.
- A. Leandro, L’assunzione delle prove all’estero in materia civile nell’era dell’innovazione digitale, Giappichelli, 2021, OA accessible here.
English summary of contents: Regulation (EU) 2020/1783 on the taking of evidence abroad in civil and commercial matters is set to replace Regulation (EC) 1206/2001, further simplifying and accelerating its processes. It envisages a decentralized computer system designed to reduce the time and cost of transmitting documents between authorities in different countries. The book, produced as part of the EJNita – Building Bridges project, funded by the European Union, first of all gives an account of the process of digitalization of justice of which the regulation is an expression, and then analyzes – with a focus on the needs of the operator – the scope of application of the new regulation and the various procedures it provides for the taking of evidence. An appendix collects the main case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union relating to the subject matter.
- Cristina M. Mariottini, The Singapore Convention on International Mediated Settlement Agreements: A New Status for Party Autonomy in the Non-Adjudicative Process, in 1(2) Giustizia consensuale (2021), 347-363
- EUCJ, judgement 10 February 2022, in case C-522/20, OE v. VY, preliminary ruling on the jurisdiction to hear and determine an application for divorce under Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003, ruling that: «The principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality, enshrined in Article 18 TFEU, must be interpreted as not precluding a situation in which the jurisdiction of the courts of the Member State in the territory of which the habitual residence of the applicant is located, as provided for in the sixth indent of Article 3(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000, is subject to the applicant being resident for a minimum period immediately before making his or her application which is six months shorter than that provided for in the fifth indent of Article 3(1)(a) of that regulation on the ground that the person concerned is a national of that Member State»
- The Italian Corte di cassazione, judgement no. 39391 dated 10 December 2021, held that it must be recognized the United States judgement ordering the payment of damages related to the NY 9/11 attacks upon the Islamic Republic of Iran, rejecting the objection to the recognition of such judgement based on the immunity of states. The reasoning is based upon the principle, held by Italian jurisprudence, that the customary rule of international law, which imposes on states the obligation to refrain from exercising judicial power for acts iure imperii, is not unconditional but is limited in light of the absolute primacy of the fundamental values of freedom and dignity of the human person and, consequently, it cannot be invoked in the presence of behaviors ascribed to the foreign state of such gravity as to be considered crimes – and specifically in that case as crimes against humanity – as they are detrimental to the universal values of respect for human dignity that transcend the interests of individual state communities.
- Conference: Regulation BIa: A standard for free circulation of judgment and mutual trust in the EU (JUDGTRUST), 21-22 April 2022, T.M.C. Asser Institute https://www.asser.nl/education-events/events/?id=4242. Speakers include our coordinators Prof. Dr. Francesca Clara Villata (UMIL) and Prof. Dr. Burkhard Hess (MPILU)