Interfaces between National and EU Law

Dr. Giovanni Chiapponi

doi:10.5771/9783748944737

Summary

This book aims at exploring possible solutions to remove the obstacles to the free circulation of judgments in the civil justice area which arise from the remarkably different national rules on procedural time limits. The interplay between national and EU law reveals that time limits raise significant challenges connected with the right to a fair trial under Art. 6 ECHR and Art. 47 CFR, which negatively impact EU cross-border civil litigation. To overcome some of the weaknesses of the current legal framework governing the cross-border enforcement of judgments and strengthen the parties’ procedural rights, the book intends to determine whether and to what extent time limits can be harmonised at EU level. Giovanni Chiapponi is doctor in law at the universities of Luxembourg and Bologna.

Keywords

Search publication

Bibliographic data

Copyright year: 2024
Publication date: 23.05.2024
ISBN-Print: 978-3-7560-1799-7
ISBN-Online: 978-3-7489-4473-7
Publisher: Nomos, Baden-Baden
Series: Luxemburger Juristische Studien - Luxembourg Legal Studies
Volume: 26
Language: English
Pages: 237
Product type: Book Titles

Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis No access Pages 1 - 18
Foreign legal terms No access Pages 19 - 20
1. A) Research question No access
2. B) Scope of the research No access
3. C) Methodology No access
4. D) Structure of the research No access
1. 1. I) Punctum temporis or distantia temporis? No access
  2. II) Time limits as an autonomous legal tool within the proceedings No access
2. 1. I) Source: legal or judicial time limits No access
  2. II) Rationale: acceleratory or dilatory time limits No access
  3. III) Legal consequences: peremptory or non-peremptory time limits No access
3. 1. I) The indissoluble link between time limits and parties’ rights and duties No access
  2. II) The impact of time limits on judges’ activities in the proceedings No access
  3. III) Competing interests underlying time limits No access
1. 1. 1. 1. a) Effective service No access
      2. i) Dies a quo under national law No access
        α) Date of service under Art. 13 No access
        β) Art. 12 No access
        bb) Expiry of the time to react No access
        cc) The length of the time to react No access
        i) LKW Walter: open question on the length of the time limit No access
        ii) Defective service No access
        iii) Running of time limits during the summer period No access
      3. c) Redefining the notion of sufficient time under Art. 45 (1)(b)? No access
    2. 1. a) General time limits for challenging judgments No access
      2. aa) Time limits for filing an action under the Service Regulation Recast No access
        bb) The notion of reasonable time No access
      3. c) Possible breach of the right of defence? No access
  2. 1. 1) The public policy exception No access
    2. 1. a) Wrong qualification of the public policy ground for refusal No access
      2. b) Expiry of time limits to appeal without prior service of the judgment on the defendant No access
    3. 3) No need to address the issue in future reforms No access
2. 1. 1. 1) Non-discrimination of national and foreign defendants No access
    2. 1. a) Al Bosco and the time limits to enforce foreign judgments No access
      2. b) Overruling the Al Bosco solution? No access
  2. 1. 1) Uncertain time limits No access
    2. 2) Interpreting the notion of reasonable time No access
    3. 3) Need for clarification? No access
3. 1. 1. 1. a) Dies a quo No access
      2. b) Interruption and suspension of time limits according to national law (C-18/21) No access
      3. c) The alleged shortness of the time limits in consumer law proceedings No access
    2. 1. a) Uniform time limits governing ESCP proceedings No access
      2. b) The lack of a unform time limit to appeal No access
    3. 1. aa) Proof of having initiated proceedings No access
        bb) Issuing the decision No access
        cc) Appeal against the refusal to issue an EAPO No access
        dd) Recognition and enforcement of the EAPO No access
        ee) Implementation of the EAPO No access
        ff) Need to regulate the time limits to enforce the EAPO No access
      2. i) Insufficient time for challenging the EAPO No access
        ii) Expiry of the time limits to enforce the judgment underlying the EAPO No access
        iii) Public policy in the Member State of enforcement No access
        i) Absence of uniform time limits for lodging the remedies No access
        ii) Time limits for deciding on the remedies No access
        iii) Time limits to appeal decisions on the remedies No access
        cc) No need to address any specific deficiency No access
  2. 1. 1. a) Art. 19 EEO No access
      2. b) Art. 20 EPO No access
      3. c) Art. 18 ESCP No access
    2. 1. aa) Absolute lack of service of the documents instituting the proceedings No access
        bb) Lack of uniform time limits for review No access
      2. aa) Assessment by national courts under Art. 19 EEO No access
        bb) Assessment by national courts under Arts 20 EPO and 18 ESCP No access
      3. c) Need for reform? No access
1. 1. 1. 1) Possible measures No access
    2. 2) Beyond the internal market No access
    3. 3) Limitation to cases with cross-border implications No access
    4. 4) Legislative procedure No access
    5. 5) Choice of instruments No access
    6. 6) Horizontal harmonisation of time limits No access
  2. 1. 1) Vertical dimension of EU procedural law No access
    2. 2) Sectoral harmonisation of time limits No access
  3. III) Art. 81 TFEU as the most appropriate legal basis? No access
2. 1. 1. 1) A level playing field in the internal market No access
    2. 2) Fundamental rights perspective No access
  2. 1. 1) Procedural diversity as an advantage No access
    2. 1. aa) Calculation of time limits No access
        i) Time to react in general first instance proceedings No access
        ii) Time to oppose the issuance of payment orders No access
        i) Time limits for lodging an appeal on factual grounds No access
        ii) Time limits for lodging an appeal on legal grounds No access
      2. b) The setting of time limits embedded in national civil procedures No access
      3. c) The technical character of the rules on computation of time No access
  3. 1. 1. a) Proposed Regulation on the computation in the Member States of time limits in civil and commercial matters No access
      2. b) Benefit No access
    2. 1. i) Amending Art. 45 (1)(b) No access
        ii) Benefit No access
        i) Amending the Art. 53 form No access
        ii) Benefit No access
        i) Deleting Art. 43 (1) and Recital 32 No access
        ii) Benefit No access
      2. i) Amending Art. 16 EPO No access
        ii) Benefit No access
        i) Amending Art. 17 ESCP No access
        ii) Benefit No access
        i) Amending Art. 19 EAPO No access
        ii) Amending Art. 22 EAPO No access
        iii) Benefit No access
        i) Amending Art. 18 ESCP No access
        ii) Amending Art. 20 EPO No access
        iii) Amending Art. 19 EEO No access
        iiii) Benefit No access
Conclusions No access Pages 205 - 210
1. 1. I) Books No access
  2. II) Book chapters No access
  3. III) Journal articles No access
  4. IV) Studies and Reports No access
  5. V) Websites and Blog No access
2. 1. I) CJEU No access
  2. II) ECtHR No access
  3. 1. 1) Italy No access
    2. 2) France No access
    3. 3) Germany No access
    4. 4) Spain No access