| | SLO | ENG | Cookies and privacy

Bigger font | Smaller font

Search the digital library catalog Help

Query: search in
search in
search in
search in
* old and bologna study programme

Options:
  Reset


1 - 2 / 2
First pagePrevious page1Next pageLast page
1.
Jurisdiction in on-line defamation and violations of privacy
Jerca Kramberger Škerl, 2017, original scientific article

Abstract: This article will address the rules of EU private international law regarding the international jurisdiction in defamation and the violations of the right to privacy committed via the internet. Being that there is no common conflict of laws rule regarding these issues and a number of different courts hold jurisdiction, great efforts are being taken to prevent the so called "forum shopping", or, as regards to defamation, "libel tourism". It is namely very hard to strike a fair balance between the procedural rights of both parties, since this is strongly connected with striking a balance between the freedom of speech, on one hand, and personality rights, on the other, all of which are fundamental rights. During the internet era, the problems regarding cross-border issues on defamation and privacy cases rose to a whole new dimension. The interpretation of the traditional connecting factor, the place where the harmful event occurred, became very difficult. Over the years, the Court of Justice of the EU has issued several milestone judgments interpreting Article 7(2) of the Brussels I Recast Regulation in such a way that the particularities of violations committed via the internet are taken into account.
Keywords: defamation, personality rights, privacy, jurisdiction, private international law, libel tourism, forum shopping, Brussels I Recast, torts, delicts
Published: 02.08.2018; Views: 511; Downloads: 45
.pdf Full text (511,68 KB)
This document has many files! More...

2.
Characteristics of Austrian remedies against enforcement and a general analysis of their suitability for achieving the objectives of Brussels I recast
Bettina Nunner-Krautgasser, 2015, original scientific article

Abstract: Regulation No 1215/2012 (Brussels Ia or Brussels I Recast) was another big step forward towards the establishment of a genuine European judicial area. In the wake of the Brussels I Recast, two facts have rather soon become apparent: One, several well- known (or better: infamous) issues are sadly still unsolved. And two, some other issues have emerged. Because of the abolishment of the “exequatur procedure”, esp. the issue of remedies against enforcement, in both the Member State of origin as well as in the Member State of enforcement, has gained more importance again. Therefore this paper analysis the characteristics of Austrian remedies in enforcement and their suitability for achieving the objects of Brussels I Recast.
Keywords: Brussels I Recast, remedies in enforcement, cross- border enforcement, abolition of “exequatur”, Art. 46 Brussels I a Recast, grounds for refusal of the enforcement, implementation in the national system of remedies in enforcement
Published: 02.08.2018; Views: 335; Downloads: 31
.pdf Full text (440,07 KB)
This document has many files! More...

Search done in 0.06 sec.
Back to top
Logos of partners University of Maribor University of Ljubljana University of Primorska University of Nova Gorica