EVALUATING THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE AND ABUSE OF PROCESS: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE MARIANA JURISDICTION CHALLENGE [2022] AND THE EUROPEAN SYSTEM OF LAW FOR CIVIL AND COMMERCIAL MATTERS FOR A THIRD STATE

Pedro Domingos
{"title":"EVALUATING THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE AND ABUSE OF PROCESS: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE MARIANA JURISDICTION CHALLENGE [2022] AND THE EUROPEAN SYSTEM OF LAW FOR CIVIL AND COMMERCIAL MATTERS FOR A THIRD STATE","authors":"Pedro Domingos","doi":"10.33327/ajee-18-7.2-a000204","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background:\nThis research critically analyses the jurisdictional challenges and their implications for the proper administration of justice in the case of Mariana vs. BHP Group [2022] EWCA Civ 951. The legal route taken by the High Court of Appeal is examined, considering both the proceedings in the UK (pre-Brexit) and a third state (Brazil). This text examines the impact of the European legal framework on EU member states and evaluates the approach of UK towards Article 34 of the Brussels Regulation. The analysis examines whether pursuing damages based in civil or commercial liability suffered by victims domiciled in a Third State through European jurisdiction is appropriate.\nMethods:\nThe study employs a case law analysis, supported by doctrinal legal research methodology, to systematically examine the balance of the principle of forum non conveniens and the consistent application of the Brussels Regulation in the Mariana Case. This is a critical review of the UK High Court's decision to overturn Judge Turner's ruling. The review emphasizes the adherence to historical national precedents, European Union Law, and the European Court of Justice's previous rulings against the United Kingdom's strike-out legal technique. The article explores the complexities of administering justice, focusing on the interplay between case management discretion, the principle of proportionality, and the court's responsibility to ensure a fair trial. It analyses the impact of factors such as the court's structure, case complexity, and the time required for resolution within this framework, while also considering the court's duty to administer justice effectively. .\nResults and Conclusions:\nThe study's findings enhance comprehension of jurisdiction challenges in transnational litigations within the European Legal System and their implications for the proper administration of justice. The article recommends a balanced approach that upholds the substantial rights of claimants while aligning national practices with EU civil liability standards, promoting judicial harmony in transnational civil and commercial liability cases in the European Union.","PeriodicalId":502146,"journal":{"name":"Access to Justice in Eastern Europe","volume":"133 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Access to Justice in Eastern Europe","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33327/ajee-18-7.2-a000204","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This research critically analyses the jurisdictional challenges and their implications for the proper administration of justice in the case of Mariana vs. BHP Group [2022] EWCA Civ 951. The legal route taken by the High Court of Appeal is examined, considering both the proceedings in the UK (pre-Brexit) and a third state (Brazil). This text examines the impact of the European legal framework on EU member states and evaluates the approach of UK towards Article 34 of the Brussels Regulation. The analysis examines whether pursuing damages based in civil or commercial liability suffered by victims domiciled in a Third State through European jurisdiction is appropriate. Methods: The study employs a case law analysis, supported by doctrinal legal research methodology, to systematically examine the balance of the principle of forum non conveniens and the consistent application of the Brussels Regulation in the Mariana Case. This is a critical review of the UK High Court's decision to overturn Judge Turner's ruling. The review emphasizes the adherence to historical national precedents, European Union Law, and the European Court of Justice's previous rulings against the United Kingdom's strike-out legal technique. The article explores the complexities of administering justice, focusing on the interplay between case management discretion, the principle of proportionality, and the court's responsibility to ensure a fair trial. It analyses the impact of factors such as the court's structure, case complexity, and the time required for resolution within this framework, while also considering the court's duty to administer justice effectively. . Results and Conclusions: The study's findings enhance comprehension of jurisdiction challenges in transnational litigations within the European Legal System and their implications for the proper administration of justice. The article recommends a balanced approach that upholds the substantial rights of claimants while aligning national practices with EU civil liability standards, promoting judicial harmony in transnational civil and commercial liability cases in the European Union.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估司法和滥用程序:对马里亚纳管辖权挑战[2022]和第三国民商事欧洲法律体系的批判性分析
背景:本研究批判性地分析了玛丽安娜诉必和必拓集团[2022] EWCA Civ 951一案中的管辖权挑战及其对正当司法的影响。研究了高等上诉法院所采取的法律途径,同时考虑了英国(脱欧前)和第三国(巴西)的诉讼程序。本文研究了欧洲法律框架对欧盟成员国的影响,并评估了英国对《布鲁塞尔条例》第 34 条的态度。方法:本研究采用判例法分析,并辅以法学理论研究方法,系统地考察了不方便法院原则与《布鲁塞尔条例》在马里亚纳案中的一致适用之间的平衡。这是对英国高等法院推翻特纳法官裁决的批判性评论。评论强调了对历史上的国家先例、欧盟法律以及欧洲法院之前针对英国 "罢免 "法律手段的裁决的坚持。文章探讨了司法的复杂性,重点关注案件管理自由裁量权、相称性原则和法院确保公平审判的责任之间的相互作用。文章分析了法院结构、案件复杂程度以及在此框架内解决问题所需时间等因素的影响,同时还考虑了法院有效司法的职责。.结果与结论:研究结果加深了人们对欧洲法律体系内跨国诉讼中的管辖权挑战及其对正当司法的影响的理解。文章建议采取一种平衡的方法,既维护索赔人的实质性权利,又使国家实践与欧盟民事责任标准相一致,从而促进欧盟跨国民事和商业责任案件中的司法和谐。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
THE FIRST STEPS IN IMPLEMENTING THE UKRAINIAN STRATEGY FOR RESTORING THE RIGHTS OF OWNERS OF CERTAIN CATEGORIES OF REAL ESTATE DAMAGED OR DESTROYED AS A RESULT OF THE ARMED AGGRESSION OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION Interplay of Crises: Mapping the Scientific Landscape of Intersecting Themes in the Covid-19 Pandemic and the Russian-Ukraine War ASSESSING THE LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC ON ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS IN THE UNITED ARAB EMIRATES: COMPARATIVE REVIEW NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION (NATO) AND ITS ROLE FOR SECURITY IN THE WESTERN BALKANS COMBATTING SEXUAL VIOLENCE IN KOSOVO: GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES AND LOCAL SOLUTIONS
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1