Yearbook of Private International Law Vol. XVIII - 2016/2017最新文献_第3页

Distance Torts: the Mines de Potasse Decision Forty Years on 距离侵权:Potasse矿井判决四十年来

Yearbook of Private International Law Vol. XVIII - 2016/2017 Pub Date : 2018-12-31 DOI: 10.9785/9783504385637-004

C. Javier

引用次数: 0

Third Party and Contract in the Conflict of Laws 法律冲突中的第三方与合同

Yearbook of Private International Law Vol. XVIII - 2016/2017 Pub Date : 2018-12-31 DOI: 10.9785/9783504385637-023

Sarah Laval

引用次数: 0

The Speech Act and the Enforcement of Foreign Libel Judgments in the United States 《言论法》与美国外国诽谤判决的执行

Yearbook of Private International Law Vol. XVIII - 2016/2017 Pub Date : 2017-07-06 DOI: 10.9785/9783504385637-012

J. Coyle

引用次数: 0

Recognition or Non-Recognition of Foreign Civil Marriages in Israel 以色列承认或不承认外国民事婚姻

Yearbook of Private International Law Vol. XVIII - 2016/2017 Pub Date : 2017-07-04 DOI: 10.9785/9783504385637-015

Yitshak Cohen

{"title":"Recognition or Non-Recognition of Foreign Civil Marriages in Israel","authors":"Yitshak Cohen","doi":"10.9785/9783504385637-015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.9785/9783504385637-015","url":null,"abstract":"The State of Israel determined by legislation that matters of personal status including marriage and divorce are subject to personal law, namely religious law. Since the applicable law is personal and not territorial, it varies from person to person and is not uniform as under civil law. This simply means that Israel has no separation of religion and state in matters of divorce and marriage. Religion is the only determining factor in these matters. Thus, marriages prohibited by religious law do not take place in Israel. This is true of all four major religions in Israel: Christianity, Islam, the Druze religion, and Judaism. The discussion under Israeli law should have ended here with regard to civil marriage performed in a foreign country, especially marriage prohibited by Jewish law such as marriage between spouses only one of whom is Jewish, or marriage of a same-sex couple. Prohibited marriage has no place in a state in which religious law prevails in matters of status. \u0000However, the Israeli courts, unlike the legislature, have more of a civil orientation than a religious one. They look for ways to bridge the gap between religious law and the rules of private international law that seek to recognize or respect civil legal actions carried out in a foreign country. In some cases, the courts have recognized the status of civil marriages even where such marriages are prohibited by state law. In order to avoid the serious conflict between religious law and the domestic rules of private international law, the court has explained that this is not a matter of personal status but rather an administrative question which purely concerns the Population Registry. For example, same-sex couples can today be registered as married couples in the Population Registry if they were married in a civil ceremony in a foreign country. \u0000The decisions made in these matters are greatly disputed and reflect the constant prevailing tensions regarding Israel not only as a Jewish state (characterized by religious law), but also as a democratic state (characterized, among other factors, by recognition of the rules of private international law). Although the Basic Laws stipulate that Israel is both, in practice these values conflict and often collide. This tension is clearly reflected in, and may be analyzed through, the issue of civil marriages performed in a foreign country and prohibited by religious law in Israel.","PeriodicalId":284503,"journal":{"name":"Yearbook of Private International Law Vol. XVIII - 2016/2017","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129318227","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Comity: the American Development of a Transnational Concept 礼让:一种跨国概念的美国发展

Yearbook of Private International Law Vol. XVIII - 2016/2017 Pub Date : 2017-06-07 DOI: 10.9785/9783504385637-011

T. Schultz, N. Ridi

{"title":"Comity: the American Development of a Transnational Concept","authors":"T. Schultz, N. Ridi","doi":"10.9785/9783504385637-011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.9785/9783504385637-011","url":null,"abstract":"Throughout much of the world, the concept of comity has played a fundamental role in shaping modern private international law. Sometimes labelled as a “principle”, sometimes as a “doctrine,” it provided the foundation and informed the evolution of several rules of conflict. Its importance, however, gradually faded as the field of private international law slid into the preserve of the national legislator. Scholarly attention to the subject followed suit, and private international lawyers have, by and large, dismissed it as a historical relic in the name of which courts would sometimes fine-tune the reach of their national substantive law and jurisdictional rules, refrain from questioning the lawfulness of another sovereign state’s acts, and restrict themselves from issuing such judgments and orders when to do so would have amounted to an unjustifiable interference. Comity, however, never really vanished: as Lord Collins of Mapesbury put it, “comity may be a discredited concept in the eyes of the text-writers, but it thrives in the judicial decisions” – in particular, in those of American courts. This conclusion is not entirely surprising: comity has long been acknowledged as a foundational principle of American conflict of laws. It had a complex and haphazard evolution in the continent, which is partly to blame for modern assessments of the concept as imprecise and confusing. Yet, while the term has come to be employed to refer to a variety of practices, these practices share “certain methods, values, and justificatory rhetoric.” \u0000The purpose of this study is to contribute to the elucidation of the notion of comity as it is understood in the United States – the jurisdiction where the greatest importance is attached to the concept. While other studies have examined this topic, they have mostly neglected to consider the phenomenon in a broader dimension and thus properly appraise the peculiarity of the American understanding of comity. It is submitted that this is particularly important insofar as the American understanding has affected the development of legal doctrines elsewhere, and stimulated further reflection on the role of the concept, especially when employed by prominent American scholars. This has in turn prompted the revitalisation of comity as a tool capable of alleviating problems of a global nature.","PeriodicalId":284503,"journal":{"name":"Yearbook of Private International Law Vol. XVIII - 2016/2017","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116318085","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Jurisdiction in the Fourth Restatement of Foreign Relations Law 对外关系法第四次重述中的管辖权

Yearbook of Private International Law Vol. XVIII - 2016/2017 Pub Date : 2017-05-23 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.2972612

William S. Dodge

引用次数: 3