The Court of justice of the European union admits the possible classification of judgment and orders of the High Court as “quasi” anti-suit injunctions when the purpose of that judgment and those orders is, at very least, to deter a party from bringing or continuing proceedings before the courts of a member State. All these aspects are conside red, by the ECJ, in breach of the concept of public policy (Art. 34 regulation n.44/2001) For these reasons, a court of a member State may refuse to recognise and enforce a judgment of a court or tribunal of another member State on the ground that it is contrary to public policy, where that judgment impedes the continuation of proceedings pending before another court or tribunal of the former member State, in that it grants one of the parties provisional damages, the amount of which is not final and is predicated on the continuation of the proceedings.
Un nuovo capitolo nella “saga” delle anti-suit injunctions. La decisione della Corte di giustizia dell’Unione europea nel caso “Alexandros T” e l’avvento delle “quasi” anti-suit injunctions / Vinciguerra, Paolo. - In: DIRITTO DEL COMMERCIO INTERNAZIONALE. - ISSN 1593-2605. - STAMPA. - 38:(2024), pp. 819-836.
Un nuovo capitolo nella “saga” delle anti-suit injunctions. La decisione della Corte di giustizia dell’Unione europea nel caso “Alexandros T” e l’avvento delle “quasi” anti-suit injunctions
Vinciguerra, Paolo
2024-01-01
Abstract
The Court of justice of the European union admits the possible classification of judgment and orders of the High Court as “quasi” anti-suit injunctions when the purpose of that judgment and those orders is, at very least, to deter a party from bringing or continuing proceedings before the courts of a member State. All these aspects are conside red, by the ECJ, in breach of the concept of public policy (Art. 34 regulation n.44/2001) For these reasons, a court of a member State may refuse to recognise and enforce a judgment of a court or tribunal of another member State on the ground that it is contrary to public policy, where that judgment impedes the continuation of proceedings pending before another court or tribunal of the former member State, in that it grants one of the parties provisional damages, the amount of which is not final and is predicated on the continuation of the proceedings.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
COMMENTO ALLA SENTENZA ALEXANDROS T.pdf
Solo gestori archivio
Tipologia:
Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza d'uso:
Tutti i diritti riservati
Dimensione
442.93 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
442.93 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.