Free Movement of Civil Judgments in the European Union and the Right to a Fair Trial

Monique Hazelhorst is Academic Researcher at the Supreme Court of the Netherlands. She studied Law and Legal Research at Utrecht University and holds a Ph.

Meer over Monique Hazelhorst

Monique Hazelhorst

Free Movement of Civil Judgments in the European Union and the Right to a Fair Trial

Name: Free Movement of Civil Judgments in the European Union and the Right to a Fair Trial
Author: Monique Hazelhorst

Specificaties

Gebonden, 445 blz. | Engels

T.M.C. Asser Press | 1e druk, 2017

ISBN13: 9789462651616

Rubricering

Hoofdrubriek : Juridisch

T.M.C. Asser Press 1e druk, 2017 9789462651616

Verwachte levertijd ongeveer 9 werkdagen

192,99

In winkelwagen

Samenvatting

This book examines the attainment of complete free movement of civil judgments across EU member states from the perspective of its conformity with the fundamental right to a fair trial. In the integrated legal order of the European Union, it is essential that litigants can rely on a judgment no matter where in the EU it was delivered. Effective mechanisms for cross-border recognition and the enforcement of judgments provide both debtors and creditors with the security that their rights, including their right to a fair trial, will be protected. In recent years however, the attainment of complete free movement of civil judgments, through simplification or abolition of these mechanisms, became a priority for the European legislator.

The text uniquely combines a thorough discussion of EU legislation with an in-depth and critical examination of its interplay with fundamental rights. It contains an overview and comparison of both ECtHR and CJEU case law on the right to a fair trial, and provides a great number of specific recommendations for current and future legislation.

With its critical discussion of EU Regulations from both a practical and a theoretical standpoint, this book is particularly relevant to legislators and policymakers working in this field. Because of the extensive overview of the functioning of the EU’s mechanisms and of relevant case law it provides the book is also highly relevant to academics and practitioners.

Trefwoorden

europees recht civiel procesrecht eerlijk proces vrij verkeer fundamentele rechten erkenning uitspraken eu wetgeving wederzijdse erkenning tenuitvoerlegging publieke orde brussels verordening hof van justitie europees hof mensenrechten grensoverschrijdend minimum standaarden rechtsbescherming wederzijds vertrouwen internationale samenwerking european enforcement order maintenance regulation uniform procedures

Trefwoorden

Specificaties

ISBN13:9789462651616

Taal:Engels

Bindwijze:gebonden

Aantal pagina's:445

Uitgever:T.M.C. Asser Press

Druk:1

Verschijningsdatum:28-3-2017

Hoofdrubriek:Juridisch

Jongbloed:Europees recht

Over Monique Hazelhorst

Monique Hazelhorst is Academic Researcher at the Supreme Court of the Netherlands. She studied Law and Legal Research at Utrecht University and holds a Ph.D. in Law from the Erasmus School of Law at Erasmus University Rotterdam

Andere boeken door Monique Hazelhorst

Bekijk alle boeken

Inhoudsopgave

U kunt van deze inhoudsopgave een PDF downloaden

1. Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Introduction: The Case of Maronier v. Larmer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2 Background: Free Movement of Judgments in the European Union. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Relevance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.4 Aims of This Book. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.5 Structure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.6 Case Law. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Part I: Evolution of Free Movement of Civil Judgments in Europe and the Role of Fair Trial
2 The Evolution of Free Movement of Civil Judgments in the European Union. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.2 Free Movement of Civil Judgments in the EU: Historical and Political Background. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.2.1 Free Movement of Judgments and the Internal Market. . . . . 17
2.2.2 The Introduction of Mutual Recognition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.2.3 The Role of Mutual Recognition and Mutual Trust. . . . . . . . 27
2.2.4 Practical Arguments for Increased Free Movement. . . . . . . . 31
2.2.5 Concluding Remarks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.3 Recognition and Enforcement Under Current EU Legislation. . . . . 36
2.3.1 Features of Recognition and Enforcement in EU Civil Justice Cooperation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.3.2 Grounds for Refusal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
2.3.3 The Brussels I bis Regulation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
2.3.4 Complete Free Movement of Judgments: The Maintenance Regulation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
2.3.5 Automatic Enforcement with Minimum Standards Under the Brussels II bis Regulation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
2.3.6 Automatic Enforcement with Minimum Standards
Under the European Enforcement Order. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
2.3.7 Automatic Enforcement on the Basis of Common Rules in the Uniform Procedures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
2.3.8 Interim Conclusion: The Significance of the Reforms for Fundamental Rights Protection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
2.4 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

3. Protection of Fundamental Rights by EU Instruments on Free Movement of Civil Judgments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
3.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
3.2 The Role of the Public Policy Exception in the Protection of Fundamental Rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
3.2.1 The Concept of Public Policy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
3.2.2 Public Policy and the European Convention on Human Rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
3.2.3 The Inclusion of a Public Policy Exception in Instruments of EU Civil Procedure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
3.2.4 Substantive and Procedural Public Policy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
3.2.5 Interpretation by the Court of Justice of the European Union. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
3.2.6 Application of the Public Policy Exception in European Union Instruments by Member State Courts. . . 79
3.2.7 Conclusion: The Value of the Public Policy Exception. . . . . 87
3.3 The Role of Other Grounds for Refusal in the Protection of Fundamental Rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
3.3.1 The Protection of the Defendant in Default Proceedings. . . . 90
3.3.2 Special Jurisdiction (Article 35 Brussels I, 45(1)(e) Brussels I bis). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
3.3.3 Hearing of the Child (23(b) Brussels II bis) or Other Interested Person (23(d) Brussels II bis). . . . . . . . . 95
3.4 The Protective Function of Control by the Member State Addressed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
3.4.1 The Value of a Cross-Border Check. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
3.4.2 Replacement of Refusal Grounds with Minimum Standards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
3.4.3 Alternative Remedies: Appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
3.4.4 Interim Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
3.5 Fundamental Rights Protection in the Absence of Refusal Grounds: The Zarraga Case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
3.6 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
Conclusion to Part I

Part II The Framework for the Protection of the Right to a Fair Trial in Europe
4. The Right to a Fair Trial in Civil Cases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
4.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
4.2 The Right to a Fair Civil Trial in the European Treaties. . . . . . . . . . 126
4.2.1 Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
4.2.2 EU Law and Article 47 of the EU Charter on Fundamental Rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
4.2.3 Relationship and Interplay. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
4.2.4 Structure, Internal Connections, and Interpretation. . . . . . . . 131
4.3 The Right to a Fair Civil Trial in the Case Law of the European Courts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
4.3.1 Elements of the Right to a Fair Civil Trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
4.3.2 The Right to a Fair Hearing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
4.3.3 Right to a Public Trial and Public Pronouncement of the Judgment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
4.3.4 The Right to Adjudication by an Impartial and Independent Tribunal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
4.3.5 The Right to a Trial Within a Reasonable Time. . . . . . . . . . . 157
4.3.6 The Right to Enforcement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
4.3.7 Consequences of a Failure to Observe the Right to a Fair Trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
4.4 Theoretical Foundations for the Right to a Fair Trial in Civil Cases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
4.4.1 Introduction: The Need to Delve Further into the Right to a Fair Trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
4.4.2 The Fair Civil Trial as a Means to an End. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
4.4.3 The Fair Civil Trial as an End in Itself. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
4.4.4 Is It Possible to Distinguish a ‘Core’ anda ‘Periphery’ Within Article 6(1)?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
4.5 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173

5. Free Movement of Judgments and the European Convention on Human Rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
5.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
5.2 The Scope of Application of Pellegrini. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
5.2.1 Application of Pellegrini to Situations Where Both States are Party to the ECHR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
5.2.2 Application of Pellegrini to Situations Governed by EU Law. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
5.3 A Different Frame of Reference for Intra-European Union Situations: The Bosphorus Test. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
5.3.1 Review by the ECtHR of Matters Relating to EU Law Prior to Bosphorus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
5.3.2 Bosphorus: Facts and Procedure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
5.3.3 Bosphorus: Impact and Open Questions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
5.4 Applying Bosphorus to Free Movement of Civil Judgments: The Povse Decision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
5.4.1 Povse: Background to the Decision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192
5.4.2 General Comments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
5.4.3 The Presumption of Equivalent Protection: Abstract or Concrete?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
5.4.4 Equivalent Protection: The Importance of the Preliminary Ruling Mechanism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
5.4.5 The Matter of Discretion and the Applicability of Povse to Regulations Which Contain Grounds for Refusal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
5.4.6 A Manifest Deficiency?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
5.5 The Bosphorus Doctrine After European Union Accession to the European Convention on Human Rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
5.6 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
5.6.1 Conclusions for Legislation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
5.6.2 Conclusions for Enforcing Courts or Authorities. . . . . . . . . . 225
5.6.3 Final Remarks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227

6. Free Movement of Civil Judgments and European Union Fundamental Rights Law. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
6.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
6.2 Protection of Fundamental Rights in the European Union Legal Order. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
6.2.1 The Position of Fundamental Rights in EU Law. . . . . . . . . . 233
6.2.2 The Member States Courts’ Task in the Protection
of EU CFR Rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
6.2.3 The Role of the CJEU in the Protection of EU Fundamental Rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239
6.2.4 Conclusion: The System of Fundamental Rights Protection in the EU. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241
6.3 ‘Systemic Deficiencies’ in Fundamental Rights Protection: N.S. and M.E. and Others. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242
6.3.1 The Rule: Mutual Recognition Entails a Presumption that Fundamental Rights Are Protected. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242
6.3.2 The Exception: Presumption Can Be Rebutted in Case of Systemic Deficiencies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
6.3.3 Can This Exception Be Applied in the Field of Civil Procedure?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248
6.4 The Court of Justice of the European Union’s Melloni Judgment: Member State Fundamental Rights and Mutual Recognition. . . . . . 253
6.4.1 The CJEU’s Judgment in Melloni. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254
6.4.2 Application of the Melloni Doctrine to EU Civil Procedure Law. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258
6.5 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267
Conclusion to Part II

Part III: How to Effectively Protect Fair Trial in the Context of Free Movement of Civil Judgments
7. Towards an ‘Emergency Brake’ in EU Instruments on Free Movement of Civil Judgments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279
7.1 Introduction: The Need for an Emergency Brake. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280
7.2 The Nature of the Emergency Brake: Procedural Public Policy or Fair Trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283
7.2.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283
7.2.2 The Right to a Fair Trial as a Fundamental Principle. . . . . . . 285
7.2.3 The Suitability of the Right to a Fair Trial as a Yardstick for Refusing Enforcement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287
7.2.4 Are Procedural Public Policy and Fair Trial Identical in Scope?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294
7.2.5 Substantive Public Policy and Fundamental Rights Other Than Fair Trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302
7.2.6 Interim Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304
7.3 The Conflict Between Debtor’s and Creditor’s Rights. . . . . . . . . . . . 307
7.3.1 Guidance of the ECtHR for Solving Conflicts. . . . . . . . . . . . 308
7.3.2 Methods for Resolving Conflicts Between Fundamental Rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309
7.3.3 Whether the Exercise of the Right Is Made Utterly Impossible. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 314
7.3.4 Whether Other Rights Are Also Implicated. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 316
7.3.5 Cumulative Effect. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 316
7.3.6 Other Factors to Consider. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317
7.3.7 Application to Conflicts Between Specific Elements of Fair Trial. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 319
7.3.8 Conclusion: The Threshold for Refusing Recognition or Enforcement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333
7.4 Protection of the Defaulting Defendant and the Special Jurisdiction Grounds. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334
7.5 The Need for an ‘Emergency Brake’ for Return and Access Orders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336
7.5.1 Refusal of Enforcement of Return Orders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336
7.5.2 Automatic Enforcement of Judgments Granting Rights of Access. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339
7.6 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341

8. Facilitating Enforcement of Civil Judgments Across European Union Member States. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345
8.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 346
8.2 How to Organize Judgment Import in European Union Regulations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 348
8.2.1 Requirements That Can Be Derived from ECtHR Case Law. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349
8.2.2 Implications for the Design of the Procedure for Obtaining Permission for Enforcement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352
8.2.3 Other Recommendations for the Design of an Effective Enforcement Procedure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 353
8.2.4 Assessment: How Should Judgment Import or Export Be Organized?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355
8.2.5 Conclusion on Judgment Export in Brussels I bis. . . . . . . . . 360
8.3 The Maintenance Regulation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 360
8.4 The European Enforcement Order. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 361
8.4.1 Service of the Document Instituting the Proceedings. . . . . . 362
8.4.2 Impartiality of the Judge Who Issues the EEO Certificate. . . 368
8.4.3 Right to a Fair Hearing Before a Judgment Is Declared Enforceable. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 374
8.4.4 The Right to Appeal (Non-)Certification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 375
8.4.5 Conclusion on the European Enforcement Order. . . . . . . . . . 378
8.5 The Uniform European Procedures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 378
8.5.1 The European Order for Payment Procedure. . . . . . . . . . . . . 379
8.5.2 The European Small Claims Procedure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 383
8.5.3 The Uniform Procedures and the Need for Grounds for Refusal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 394
8.6 Enforcement of Return Orders and Access Rights Under Brussels II bis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397
8.6.1 Introduction: The 1980 Hague Convention. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398
8.6.2 Reforms Achieved by the Brussels II bis Regulation and Controversy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 401
8.6.3 How Should Enforcement of Return Orders Be Organized?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403
8.6.4 Conclusion: Cross-Border Enforcement of Return Order and Access Rights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407
8.7 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 409

9. Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 413
9.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 414
9.2 The Research. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415
9.2.1 Summary of the Findings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415
9.2.2 Limitations of the Research. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418
9.3 Implications of the Findings and Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . 419
9.3.1 Implications for Academic and Political Debate. . . . . . . . . . 419
9.3.2 Implications for Legislation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420
9.4 Avenues for Further Research. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 422
9.4.1 Convergence of Civil Procedure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 422
9.4.2 Best Practices in the Application of EU Civil Procedure Law. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425
9.5 Final Remarks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 426

References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 426
List of Cases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 429
Index. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445

Anderen die dit boek kochten, kochten ook

André van Berkel

Handboek Projectbeheersing in de bouw en voor installatietechnische werken

€ 44,75
Marleen Heijsteeg

Duurzaam samenwerken na scheiding

€ 36,50
E.R. Muller

Toezicht

€ 54,50
Tromp

Misbruik van recht in de Europese btw

€ 117,81
Ton Hartlief

Verbintenissen uit de wet en schadevergoeding

€ 65,50
Gijs van Dijck

Methoden van rechtswetenschappelijk onderzoek

€ 37,95

Uw winkelwagen

Free Movement of Civil Judgments in the European Union and the Right to a Fair Trial

Samenvatting

Trefwoorden

Trefwoorden

Specificaties

Over Monique Hazelhorst

Andere boeken door Monique Hazelhorst

Inhoudsopgave

Anderen die dit boek kochten, kochten ook

Rubrieken

Populaire producten

Personen

Trefwoorden