As artificial intelligence (AI) systems become increasingly embedded in cross-border goods and services, the European Union (EU) has undertaken the ambitious task of harmonising liability and conflict-of-laws frameworks to address AI-caused damage. This article critically examines the interaction between the AI Act (AIA), the revised Product Liability Directive (PLD), and the now-withdrawn AI Liability Directive (AILD). The paper explores whether this regulatory architecture sufficiently provides legal certainty, accountability, and access to redress for victims of AI-related harm, particularly in cases involving multiple jurisdictions. Using doctrinal and comparative legal analysis, the article evaluates the substantive, temporal, and territorial scopes of these instruments and their interface with private international law, especially Article 5 of the Rome II Regulation (Rome II). It argues that while the AIA and revised PLD represent a coordinated ex-ante and ex-postregulatory scheme, gaps remain, particularly regarding immaterial harms, collective injuries, and causal complexity in opaque AI systems. The AILD, though withdrawn, would have played a crucial procedural role in harmonising fault-based liability across Member States, particularly by introducing presumptions of causation and disclosure mechanisms. The article concludes that harmonisation of EU liability frameworks requires not only legislative alignment among the AIA, PLD, and future initiatives, but also targeted reforms to private international law rules. Without such integration, the EU risks fragmented litigation, legal uncertainty, and under-enforcement of AI accountability norms across borders.
A main question of the paper is why the courts, and the judiciary are such a main focus of those in power who attack liberal democracy today. First it adresses the connections between democratic decline and rule of law backsliding. Then it adresses some historical perspectives and compare the present situation to autocracies and totalitarian experiences in Europe in the twentieth century. Finally, it discusses different measures taken by autocratic rulers to limit judicial control, how to distinguish such measures from measures of legitimate legal reform, and how to counter such measures.
Drawing from Hartley’s “Multinational Corporations and the Third World: A Conflict-of-Laws Analysis” where he exposes the “unequal fight” between powerful multinational corporations and the people and communities in “the third world”, suggesting that this is partly a consequence of the deficits of legal infrastructures therein, this brief contribution dwells on the global systemic impact of channelling legal proceedings justiciable in the Global South (GS) to courts in the Global North (GN). It takes a private international law and sustainable development perspective and draws attention to the rhetoric and narratives of interdependence between the “super highways” and the “jungle tracks”- the illustrations used by Hartley. The main argument taken forward in this paper is that to realise private international law’s contribution to SDG 16 (peace, justice and strong institutions) responsivity is necessary in jurisdictional decision making in this context to enhance access to justice for all in the GS.
امروزه مسائل زیستمحیطی، یکی از مهمترین چالشهای بینالمللی به شمار میآید و یکی از اولویتهای سران دولتها نیز شده است. شکی نیست در آیندهای نهچندان دور، ریشه اصلی اختلاف دولتها همانا مسائل زیستمحیطی و منابع طبیعی خواهد بود. در این میان کوهها به واسطه نقش بیبدیلی که در اکوسیستم ایفا مینمایند از اهمیت و جایگاه ویژهای برخوردارند؛ با این حال، کمتر در کانون توجهها قرار گرفتهاند و به همین علت، ساختار شکننده آنها بیش از پیش در معرض آسیب و تخریب قرار میگیرد. با استفاده از ظرفیتهای حقوق بینالملل میتوان نسبت به جلوگیری از تخریب بیشتر و احیای خسارات واردشده اقدام نمود چه اینکه هماکنون نیز در این حوزه اقدامات حقوقی پارهای از کشورهای اروپایی اثرات مثبتی نیز داشته است.
ABSTRACT Crypto assets and their legal qualification hold an important place in the international legal arena. There are many public and private law aspects of crypto assets that require clarification. The first difficulty lies in defining what a crypto asset is. There are many different taxonomies of crypto assets, and these vary globally. Another challenging area which demands attention is whether crypto assets bear the features of objects of ‘property’ in private law. The answer to this question is important because it affects various areas of law, such as tax law, securities law, insolvency law, contract law, even conflict of laws. This paper focuses on whether and how property law rules should be applied to crypto assets and how the legal nature of crypto assets is embarked upon and handled differently in Common Law and Civil Law Countries.
This article examines the principles of implied jurisdiction agreements and their validity on a global scale. While the existing scholarly literature primarily focuses on express jurisdiction agreements, this study addresses the evident lack of scholarly research works on implied jurisdiction agreements. As such, it contributes to an understanding of implied jurisdiction agreements, providing valuable insights into their practical implications for international commercial contracts. The paper’s central question is whether implied jurisdiction agreements are globally valid and should be enforced. To answer this question, the article explores primary and secondary sources from various jurisdictions around the world, including common law, civil law, and mixed legal systems, together with insights from experts in commercial conflict of laws. The paper argues for a cautious approach to the validity of implied jurisdiction agreements, highlighting their potential complexities and uncertainties. It contends that such agreements may lead to needless jurisdictional controversies and distract from the emerging global consensus on international jurisdiction grounds. Given these considerations, the paper concludes that promoting clear and explicit jurisdiction agreements, as supported by the extant international legal frameworks, such as the Hague Conventions of 2005 and 2019, the EU Brussels Ia Regulation, and the Lugano Convention, would provide a more predictable basis for resolving cross-border disputes.
The global pandemic generated a crisis of still unpredictable consequences, further aggravated by the war in Ukraine. In 2008 a broad consensus had emerged on the need for far-reaching reforms, which basically meant doing away with the neoliberal consensus that had prevailed since the 1980s, although the chances of recovery were soon made dependent on the economic cycle. Once again, the current crisis is calling into question the quality and effectiveness of the social protection system and the welfare state itself. The responses seem to indicate a change of direction, towards safeguarding and strengthening the public sector. The Basque Country and Navarre are affected too. Two symptoms of this are the reinforcement of investment in health, which implies reversing previous cuts, and the approval of systems to cover the most disadvantaged groups. These measures require, however, the backing of other structural measures, particularly fiscal ones.
Il est possible que deux ou plusieurs affaires connexes devant deux juridictions distinctes et egalement competentes est en train d’etre instruit et en ce cas il exige que ces affaires mettent ensemble, envisagant ces rasions: la réduction des coûts sociaux et économiques, de permetre au juge de connaître correctement le problème et de résoudre tous les aspects du litige plus rapidement, la bonne administration de la justice, la prévention des jugements contradictoires et l'intérêt d'une bonne justice de les faire instruire et juger ensemble. Dans ce cas, le demandeur et le défendeur ont le droit et même l'obligation de soulever de Exception de connexité Selon l'article 103 de la loi de procédure civile d'Iran approuvée le 9 avril 2000 après JC. L’exception de connexité peut être soulevée devant les deux juridictions .Les systèmes de procédure civile de l'Iran et de la France sont similaires à cet égard,, mais il existe également des différences : par exemple, si L’exception de connexité est acceptée, les affaires connexes devraient-elles être renvoyées devant le premier tribunal ou le deuxième tribunal ? Il est nécessaire d'avoir un lien entre les affaires dans la procédure civile iranienne et française. Le lien peut être un lien simple,un lien suffisant et un lien complet(l’indivisibilité des pretentions). Il semble qu'un lien simple ne puisse pas de se dessaisir et de renvoyer de l'affaire, mais un lien suffisant et un lien complète peuvent de se dessaisir et de renvoyer de l’affaire. Parce que dans ce cas il existe entre les litiges un lien tel qu'il soit de l'intérêt d'une bonne justice de les faire instruire ou juger ensemble.En Iran L’exception de connexité a caractéristique de l’ordre public Donc Le juge peut, d'office, ordonner la jonction de plusieurs instances pendantes devant lui Mais en France Il résulte des articles 101 et 103 Code de procédure civile que le renvoi pour connexité doit être demandé par les parties. On admet que le juge ne peut relever d’office l’existence d’une connexité entre deux affaires.L’exception de connexité peut être soulevée par l’une des parties, mais aussi par un tiers mis en cause ou intervenant volontairement au litige Et pour raisond'ordre public. Le délai de soulevée L’exception de connexité , contrairement à la règle stipulée à l'article 87 du Code de procédure civile, qui stipule que les exceptions doivent être soulevées avant la fin de la première audience, Elle peut être déposée devant la Cour d'appel et la Cour de cassation. Par consequent le délai pour soulevée L’exception de connexité n'est qu'à la fin de la première audience. En France, il y a toujours eu un scepticisme face aux exceptions à la tradition héritée du droit romain.Parce que les soulevée entraîne des retards dans les procédures et la justice. Selon cette tradition issue de la domination romaine in limine litis, à l'article 74 du Code de procédure civile, il est stipulé que Les exceptions doivent, à peine d'irrecevabilité, être soulevées simultanément et avant toute défense au fond ou fin de non-recevoir. Il en est ainsi alors même que les règles invoquées au soutien de l'exception seraient d'ordre public.La demande de communication de pièces ne constitue pas une cause d'irrecevabilité des exceptions. Les dispositions de l'alinéa premier ne font pas non plus obstacle à l'application des articles 103, 111, 112 et 118. Il est précisé à l'article 103 que L'exception de connexité peut être proposée en tout état de cause, sauf à être écartée si elle a été soulevée tardivement dans une intention dilatoire.Ce qui est dit à l'article 103 » sauf à être écartée si elle a été soulevée tardivement dans une intention dilatoire.«peut être critique est critiquable. , Parce que l'objectif principal L’exception de connexité est la prévention des jugements contradictoires et avec cette déclaration, cet objectif est violé.en France Les recours contre les décisions rendues sur la connexité par les juridictions du premier degré sont formés et jugés comme en matière d'exception d'incompétence.En cas de recours multiples, la décision appartient à la cour d'appel la première saisie qui, si elle fait droit à l'exception, attribue l'affaire à celle des juridictions qui, selon les circonstances, paraît la mieux placée pour en connaître. Mais en Iran Les les decisions Concernant L’exception de connexité ne sont sujettes à aucun recours. Il s’agit d’une faille dans la loi et il est suggéré de la modifier. le fait de ne pas pouvoir porter plainte dans ce domaine est l'un des défauts de la loi sur la procédure civile, et il est suggéré que la loi soit amendée.Lorsque les juridictions saisies ne sont pas de même degré, l'exception de connexité ne peut être soulevée que devant la juridiction du degré inférieur. Bien que cela soit contraire au principe Double degré de jurisdiction. Les tribunaux français ont rarement accepté la connexité international Mais en Iran, selon l’article 971 du Code civil, cela n’est pas acceptable.
Crypto-assets (tokens on a distributed ledger network) can be handled much in the same way as tangible assets as they may be held without the involvement of intermediaries and traded on a peer-to-peer basis by virtue of the blockchain technology. Consequently, crypto-assets give rise to proprietary issues in the virtual world, as do tangible assets in the real world. This article will consider how the law applicable to the proprietary issues of crypto-assets should be determined. It will first examine some of the cases where restitution was sought of crypto-asset units and consider what issues arising in such contexts may be characterised as proprietary for the purpose of conflict of laws. Finding that the conventional connecting factors for proprietary issues are not suitable for crypto-assets, this article will consider whether party autonomy, generally rejected for proprietary issues, should be embraced as well as what the objective connecting factors should be.
The Article provides an insight into the development of the Russian rules of law concerning recognition of foreign judgments on personal status. The analysis reveals that initially the Russian (formerly Soviet) law did not include any specific provisions relating to recognition of foreign judgments on personal status. In this regard such judgments were recognised on the basis of the conflict of laws’ provisions of the Family and Civil Codes. In turn the current Article 415 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation addressing the recognition of foreign judgments on personal status and foreign divorces should be considered as a borrowing from the legislation of the former Socialist countries. The authors argue that the concept of “personal status” in Article 415 covers both foreign judgments affecting capacity and regarding filiation (kinship). Therefore, these foreign judgments shall be recognised in Russia in absence of an international treaty and without exequatur proceedings.
The conflict of laws rules within the scope of private international law determines which country's law will be applied in disputes with foreign elements. In Turkish private international law, these regulations are included in the Law No. 5718 on Private International and Procedural Law (PIPL). Article 28 of the PIPL determines the applicable law to the copyright contracts involving a foreign element. This article covers both contracts regarding the transfer of intellectual rights and contracts regarding the transfer of the use of these rights; includes subjective and objective conflict of laws rules. Some problems that may arise while determining the law to be applied to the basis of the copyright contract during the application of the article 28 of PIPL. In this study, the information has been provided about these problems and their solutions.
The recent introduction of AI tools in the justice sector poses several ethical implications as risks for judges’ independence and for procedural transparency, and discrimination biases. By developing ethical frameworks governing AI application, private and public agents have been increasingly dealing with risks pertaining to the use of AI. By inventorying and analyzing a set of ethical documents through content analysis, this study highlights the ethical implications involved in the application of AI. Moreover, by investigating the CEPEJ Charter (European Commission for the Effectiveness of Justice of the Council of Europe), the unique ethical document focusing on AI in justice, we were able to clarify potential differences between justice and other contexts of AI application with respect to risks prospected and the protection of ethical principles. The analysis confirms that the discipline of AI is a complex subject that involves very different aspects and therefore needs a broad focus on all contexts of application.
The author comments on a recent judgment by the Corte di Cassazione (Sezioni Unite Civili) touching upon particularly significant issues of private international law in matters of succession. A central issue in the judgment under review lies in the role of renvoi as an instrument of coordination between national conflict-of-laws systems. This is particularly critical in succession matters, in cases where the choice-of-law rules of the countries concerned are inspired by the opposite systems of unity rather than splitting of succession. Alongside renvoi, the judgment under review touches upon other important issues of private international law, such as characterization and the requirements for a valid optio legis by the deceased. As the author notes, while the case, due to temporal reasons, was decided pursuant to Italian private international law rules in matters of succession, comparable results would have probably been reached based on the choice-of-law rules embodied in the European Succession Regulation No. 650/2012.
Any researcher of South African diamond laws would find it inevitable that such research discusses the relationship between international diamond transactions and conflict of laws. This is particularly evident in cases where legal disputes have arisen pertaining to such transactions. This article will make reference to the terms “private international law” and “conflict of laws” interchangeably, although “conflict of laws” will be preferred for reasons of taste rather than logic. The aim of this paper is to illustrate the concept of conflict of laws in general and how it significantly impacts the manner in which courts will ultimately decide on the law to be applied in a matter possibly involving inter alia international diamond transactions. This demonstrates the consistent relevance of conflict of laws particularly in light of the global economy. The correct identification and understanding of conflict of laws’ principles can be stretched to accommodate all other areas of international trade. However, for the purposes of understanding how diamond trade is impacted by conflict of laws in South Africa, this paper will be limited to the legal context of diamond-relevant trade and the latest guidelines provided by our courts in relation to the choice of law in matters where conflict of laws has arisen.
The reason that led to this paper to be written is to explain the new meanings of the notions of ethics, integrity, responsibility and accountability - in order to hold accountable those involved, directly or indirectly, in sports. Ethics management, “as one of the disciplines of management”, deals with the development of those leadership tools that contribute to the ethical development of an organization, as well as the methods that can be used to determine in which direction organizations should develop. Sport, already considered a notable social phenomenon, requires a real “legalization” able to frame it harmoniously and consciously in the context and rigors of a civilized conduct, of the highest morality, but also of strict legality and responsibility. The author argues that ethical management seeks to improve decision-making processes, procedures and organizational structures, so that the activities of the organization are as closely related to ethical principles
Private international law. Conflict of laws, Jurisprudence. Philosophy and theory of law
The post-Cold War period has witnessed a significant increase in ‘shaping’ multinational military exercises, which are considered a valuable instrument of defence diplomacy. Shaping multinational military exercises aim to encourage the partner military's role and adapt relationship to reduce strategic uncertainty. Since 2014, Pakistan’s conduct and participation in multinational military exercises have increased significantly. Pakistan conducts four such exercises to reduce strategic uncertainty: recruitment, capacity-building, role-forming, and trust-developing. This article, therefore, argues that Pakistan pursues shaping multinational military exercises to mould the strategic thinking of both friends and potential adversaries to achieve foreign policy goals in a complex security environment.
Bibliography Entry
Bashir, Sadaf, and Sumara Gul. 2021. "Countering Terrorism and Reducing Strategic Uncertainty: Analysing ‘Shaping’ Multinational Military Exercises." Margalla Papers 25 (2): 71-83.
International relations, Private international law. Conflict of laws
Florian F. Hoffmann, Isadora d'Avila Lima Nery Gonçalves
COVID-19 has had a profound impact on migrants and refugees the world over. Their pre-existing vulnerabilities were immediately exacerbated as national health systems were often overwhelmed and many disease control measures were either inaccessible to them or had disproportionate socio-economic effects. But migrants and refugees have also been framed as prima facie causes for the transboundary spread of the virus, and public health exception and derogation clauses in both national and international refugee and human rights instruments have been used to block their entry, suspend asylum processing, or trigger deportations. Taking the example of Brazil as a point of departure, the present contribution argues that (for at least some states) the appearance of the virus seems to have served as a legal carte blanche for fundamentally reconfiguring or closing down border regimes. More specifically, we argue that the strategic mainstreaming of global health regulations into border regimes points to the emergence of a “pandemic law” that encroaches upon already fragile transnational legal regime complexes, with the potential to upend or hollow out existing frameworks for migrant and refugee protection.
Comparative law. International uniform law, Private international law. Conflict of laws