Conflicts of Jurisdiction in Criminal Law: Lessons from European Civil Procedure

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pietro Ortolani
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Conflicts Of Jurisdiction

Conflicts of jurisdiction in criminal law Lessons from European Civil Procedure

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pietro Ortolani
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Hard Law ◽  
Conflicts Of Jurisdiction

One of the main purposes of private international law is the resolution of conflicts of jurisdiction in civil matters. In the European Union (EU), this goal is pursued by an articulate body of regulations, forming part of what is usually labelled as ‘European procedural law’ or ‘European civil procedure’. In criminal law, by contrast, no such system exists: although Eurojust aims at resolving conflicts of jurisdiction by facilitating the identification of the jurisdiction that should prosecute cross-​border crimes, no hard-​law instrument regulates this matter in a binding fashion.

The Statutorification of Common-Law Fields

2019 ◽  
pp. 212-290
Author(s):  
G. Edward White
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Legal Education ◽  
Legal Profession ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
World War ◽  
Commercial Law ◽  
The 1960S

This chapter describes the process, over an interval between the years after World War I and the 1960s, in which most of the fields considered “basic” common-law subjects in legal education and the legal profession were dramatically affected by statutory developments that sought to modify common-law rules and doctrines in the fields. By the 1960s the “statutorification” of torts, contracts, commercial law, and criminal law was partially in place, and new rules for federal civil procedure had been promulgated.

Jurisdiktionskonflikte im Rahmen transnationaler Kriminalität

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathalie Isabelle Thorhauer
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Frankfurt Am Main ◽  
Ne Bis In Idem ◽  
Current Reform ◽  
Legal Position ◽  
Liberal Approach ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Conflicts Of Jurisdiction ◽  
The Eu

The thesis examines states’ prosecutorial powers in regard to cross-border criminal acts of natural persons and companies, as well as the problems of conflicts of jurisdiction resulting from the parallel applicability of the criminal law of multiple states. It focuses on the individual legal position of the accused and norm addressee, who, in a globalised economy and society, needs to be able to distinguish right from wrong. The ne bis in idem and other mechanisms fail in an “Area of Freedom, Security and Justice” where certain normative standards require overcoming the lack of foreseeability of the applicable substantive and procedural criminal law and to eliminate leeway for arbitrary considerations of the executive (forum shopping). The work meets this demand with a transparent legal framework for the coordination of prosecutorial powers within the EU that takes a liberal approach and is based on fundamental principles of the rule of law. It deals with basic issues of the transnational scope of corporate criminal law, which should be considered in the current reform discourse. The author is a lawyer specialising in white-collar criminal law in Frankfurt am Main.

The EU and the Matter of Concerted Acting Die EU und die Frage einverständlichen Handelns La UE et la question de l'action concertée

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Linguistic Diversity ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Concerted Action ◽  
Member States ◽  
International Private Law ◽  
Economic Relationship ◽  
The Eu

The linguistic diversity of this volume's contributions, combined with the elaboration of positive examples regarding concerted actions – in spite of all crises! – between the member states, pays a unique tribute to the fact that the goal of concerted acting was already aimed at in the preamble to the EEC treaty. Relevant and contemporary examples prove that such a path may be the proper answer, if not a counter-programme to the various EU crises. These examples concern a number of political and legal fields; in particular, they relate to elements of international private law, criminal law, civil procedure law, passenger rights and data protection. Such concerted action is also dealt with in relation to the Union's external presence, in particular its economic relationship with the AU. With contributions by Dimitrios Parashu, Rita Abood, Luisa Volkhausen, Daniel Sliwiok-Born, Brou Séraphin Yoboué, David Erhardt and Jonathan Stoklas.

scholarly journals Mutual recognition, choice of forum, and lis pendens A Civil Law Threesome Transposed

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aukje van Hoek
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Working Group ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Controversial Issue ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Jurisdiction ◽  
European System

The draft proposals make a bold attempt to address a pressing and controversial issue in international criminal law. The recognition of multiple grounds of jurisdiction—​and the recent expansion thereof with regard to specific crimes—​creates a situation in which more than one country can legitimately claim jurisdiction over a specific crime or set of acts. Unlike the situation in civil procedure, there is currently no European system to coordinate criminal jurisdiction within the area of freedom of justice, and hence the international grounds of jurisdiction are also applied in full to intra-​EU cases. This creates ample possibilities for a positive conflict of jurisdiction in which more than one state may start investigations, prosecution, and/​or criminal adjudication with regard to a similar or identical set of criminal facts. As the Working Group rightly stresses, this may lead to ‘efforts and resources being wasted and potentially to arbitrary outcomes’.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document