根据《布鲁塞尔国际劳工条例》对个人雇佣合同的并行责任和管辖权

IF 0.3 Q3 LAW
M. Poesen
{"title":"根据《布鲁塞尔国际劳工条例》对个人雇佣合同的并行责任和管辖权","authors":"M. Poesen","doi":"10.1080/17441048.2020.1762978","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article sets out to map the different tests, and their corresponding theoretical foundations, used for determining whether the employment section of the Brussels Ia Regulation applies to concurrent liabilities. Thereby it will explicate the often unspoken theories that inform seemingly straightforward approaches to characterisation on which the applicability of the employment section to concurrent liabilities hinges. It argues that the preferable way forward is the “material link test”, under which the employment section should apply insofar as the facts underlying a claim have a material link to an employment relationship in terms of time, place, means or purpose. Other solutions, which are centred on the indispensability of interpreting the employment contract or the nature of a claim’s legal basis, are to be disregarded as ineffective and overly complex.","PeriodicalId":44028,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Private International Law","volume":"16 1","pages":"320 - 333"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17441048.2020.1762978","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Concurrent liabilities and jurisdiction over individual contracts of employment under the Brussels Ia Regulation\",\"authors\":\"M. Poesen\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17441048.2020.1762978\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article sets out to map the different tests, and their corresponding theoretical foundations, used for determining whether the employment section of the Brussels Ia Regulation applies to concurrent liabilities. Thereby it will explicate the often unspoken theories that inform seemingly straightforward approaches to characterisation on which the applicability of the employment section to concurrent liabilities hinges. It argues that the preferable way forward is the “material link test”, under which the employment section should apply insofar as the facts underlying a claim have a material link to an employment relationship in terms of time, place, means or purpose. Other solutions, which are centred on the indispensability of interpreting the employment contract or the nature of a claim’s legal basis, are to be disregarded as ineffective and overly complex.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44028,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Private International Law\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"320 - 333\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17441048.2020.1762978\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Private International Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17441048.2020.1762978\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Private International Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17441048.2020.1762978","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

本文阐述了不同的测试及其相应的理论基础,用于确定《布鲁塞尔国际法条例》的就业部分是否适用于并行责任。因此,它将解释那些通常不为人知的理论,这些理论为看似简单的定性方法提供了信息,就业部分对并发负债的适用性取决于这些方法。它认为,更可取的办法是“实质联系测试”,根据该测试,只要索赔所依据的事实在时间、地点、手段或目的方面与雇佣关系有实质联系,就应适用雇佣条款。其他解决方案的核心是解释就业合同的必要性或索赔法律依据的性质,这些解决方案被视为无效和过于复杂而不予理会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Concurrent liabilities and jurisdiction over individual contracts of employment under the Brussels Ia Regulation
This article sets out to map the different tests, and their corresponding theoretical foundations, used for determining whether the employment section of the Brussels Ia Regulation applies to concurrent liabilities. Thereby it will explicate the often unspoken theories that inform seemingly straightforward approaches to characterisation on which the applicability of the employment section to concurrent liabilities hinges. It argues that the preferable way forward is the “material link test”, under which the employment section should apply insofar as the facts underlying a claim have a material link to an employment relationship in terms of time, place, means or purpose. Other solutions, which are centred on the indispensability of interpreting the employment contract or the nature of a claim’s legal basis, are to be disregarded as ineffective and overly complex.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
25.00%
发文量
14
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信