scholarly journals O conceito de ação pendente no artigo 15.º do Regulamento (CE) n.º 1346/2000 relativo aos processos de insolvência: comentário ao acórdão do Tribunal de Justiça da União Europeia de 6 de junho de 2018, Tarragó da Silveira, proc. C-250/17, ecli:eu:c:2018:398 = The concept of pending lawsuit in article 15 of Regulation (EC) no 1346/2000 on insolvency proceedings: annotation on the European Court of Justice Judgment of 6 june 2018, Tarragó da Silveira, Case c-250/17, ecli:eu:c:2018:398

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 814
Author(s):  
Luís de Lima Pinheiro ◽  
João Gomes de Almeida
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Insolvency Regulation ◽  
Justice Judgment ◽  
Insolvency Proceedings ◽  
Debt Recovery

Resumo: No Acórdão Tarragó da Silveira, o Tribunal de Justiça da União Europeia responde a uma questão prejudicial colocada pelo Supremo Tribunal de Justiça (Portugal) relativa ao conceito de “ação pendente” previsto no artigo 15.º do Regulamento relativo aos processos de insolvência. O órgão jurisdicional de reenvio pretende saber se o conceito de ação pendente previsto naquele artigo inclui uma ação de condenção do devedor na obrigação de pagamento de quantia pecuniária. Este comentário examina a solução dada pelo Tribunal de Justiça da União Europeia.Palavras-chave: Regulamento relativo aos processos de insolvência; Regulamento (CE) n.º 1346/2000; conceito de ação pendente.Abstract: In the Tarragó da Silveira judgment, the European Court of Justice answers a question referred by the Portuguese Supreme Court of Justice regarding the concept of “lawsuit pending” in article 15 of the Insolvency Regulation. The referring court asks if a debt recovery action is to be considered a pending lawsuit for the purposes of article 15. This case annotation examines and evaluates the solution given by the European Court of Justice.Keywords: Insolvency Regulation; Regulation No 1346/2000; concept of lawsuit pending.

Judges and Policy Making Authority in the United States and the European Union

ICL Journal ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonios E. Kouroutakis
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Judicial Activism ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Supreme Court

AbstractInstitutions such as the US Supreme Court and the European Court of Justice in due time have developed a status of supremacy through judicial activism. The main target of the article is to identify the judicial activism exercised by these Courts and to reason its need in the legal order. In the first part the US Supreme Court and the European Court of Justice are placed in the overall polity that they belong to and the development of their status and their characteristics are analyzed. The major concern of the first part is to examine how those declared their supremacy and focus on major cases and their reason­ing.In the second part the extent of the judicial supremacy in each legal order is discussed and its effects in the decision making process are examined. The assumption that judicial activ­ism is acceptable only if it expresses consensus in the legal order is tested and it is argued that up to an extent, Judicial Activism does not distort the political agenda when it ex­presses the consensus of the legal system. Finally, it is argued that when such activism exceeds the boundaries of the consensus, the other actors in the legal system would even­tually react and would limit such activism.

European Court of Justice Jurisprudence in the Field of Avoidance Actions with International Elements for Filling the Insolvency Estate

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-210
Author(s):  
Yordanka Noneva-Zlatkova
Keyword(s):  
National Level ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Border Effect ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Insolvency Proceedings

AbstractWith the development of the internal market, the need to establish rules ensuring the protection of creditors in insolvency proceedings with a cross-border effect is increasing. Mechanisms at national level are difficult to provide the desired protection for foreign creditors. Since 26.06.2017 EU has a new Regulation 848/2015 which repeals the current Regulation 1346/2000. Despite the radical changes, it is attempting to implement this legislative act, the main objective of insolvency proceedings remains unchanged, namely, to achieve fair satisfaction of creditors. One of the mechanisms for the realisation of this objective are avoidance actions with international element for filling the insolvency estate. In view of the specifics of the procedure, the standard civil law mechanisms such as the Actio Pauliana are not impossible but are extremely inadequate and difficult to prove. In the practice of the Member States, many issues arise concerning the determination of jurisdiction and applicable law, creation of preconditions for the abuse in searching the most favourable legal system (forum shopping), there are differences in the so-called ‘suspicious periods’ and transactions concluded with affiliates. On this basis a fundamental jurisprudence of the CJEU has been enacted, the achievement of which will be the subject of this paper.

A Need for Change: The Romanian Supreme Court's Approach to 'Appeals in the Interest of Law'

2010 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 293-305
Author(s):  
Norel Neagu
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
First Century ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Strict Interpretation ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Supreme Court Decisions

AbstractThis article deals with the possibility of changing the approach to appeals in the interest of law in Romania according to the relevant guidelines extracted from the case law of the European Court of Justice. It provides a comparative analysis of Romanian Supreme Court decisions with those of the European Court of Justice with respect to guiding principles versus a strict interpretation of written legislation. The author highlights a modern path for the Romanian Court to follow in light of the requirements of the twenty-first century.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document