Abstract
[Autom. eng. transl.] I. The changes brought forward by the proposed revision of the "Brussels I" regulation in the area of jurisdiction. - II. The role of the mechanisms to monitor compliance with jurisdiction rules in the economy of regulation no. 44/2001 and the meaning of the relative innovations in light of the general objectives of the review. - III. The unofficial relief of the lack of jurisdiction and the relationship between the solution proposed by the proposal and the tacit extension of jurisdiction. - IV. The information charges borne by the plaintiff with regard to the defendant's right to object to the incompetence of the court seised and the consequences of an appearance without exception. - See Notes on the questionable silence of the proposal with respect to the problem of the connection between the declination of jurisdiction and the procedure subsequently instituted before the competent judge. - VI. Final considerations.
| Translated title of the contribution | [Autom. eng. transl.] Ensuring compliance with jurisdiction rules in the proposed revision of the "Brussels I" Regulation |
|---|---|
| Original language | Italian |
| Pages (from-to) | 144-154 |
| Number of pages | 11 |
| Journal | Cuadernos de Derecho Transnacional |
| Volume | 2011 |
| Publication status | Published - 2011 |
Keywords
- Competenza giurisdizionale
- Diritto internazionale privato
- Jurisdiction
- Private international law
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of '[Autom. eng. transl.] Ensuring compliance with jurisdiction rules in the proposed revision of the "Brussels I" Regulation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver