Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Civil procedure (2)
- Comparative law (2)
- 28 U.S.C. 1782 (1)
- Arbitration (1)
- Class action (1)
-
- Collective redress (1)
- Cremation (1)
- Discovery (1)
- Disposition of cremated remains (1)
- Dispute resolution (1)
- Disputes over cremated remains (1)
- European Union (1)
- European law (1)
- Foreign states (1)
- Foreign tribunals (1)
- Global class action (1)
- International (1)
- International Law (1)
- International commercial arbitration (1)
- International litigation (1)
- Investment arbitration (1)
- Investor-state arbitration (1)
- Litigation (1)
- New York Convention (1)
- New governance (1)
- Private international law (1)
- Public international law (1)
- Regulation (1)
- Regulatory law (1)
- Regulatory litigation (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Comparative and Foreign Law
Discovery Under 28 U.S.C. §1782: Distinguishing International Commercial Arbitration And International Investment Arbitration, S. I. Strong
Discovery Under 28 U.S.C. §1782: Distinguishing International Commercial Arbitration And International Investment Arbitration, S. I. Strong
Faculty Publications
For many years, courts, commentators and counsel agreed that 28 U.S.C. §1782 – a somewhat extraordinary procedural device that allows U.S. courts to order discovery in the United States “for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal” – did not apply to disputes involving international arbitration. However, that presumption has come under challenge in recent years, particularly in the realm of investment arbitration, where the Chevron-Ecuador dispute has made Section 1782 requests a commonplace procedure. This Article takes a rigorous look at both the history and the future of Section 1782 in international arbitration, taking care to …
Regulatory Litigation In The European Union: Does The U.S. Class Action Have A New Analogue?, S. I. Strong
Regulatory Litigation In The European Union: Does The U.S. Class Action Have A New Analogue?, S. I. Strong
Faculty Publications
This article is the first to consider the European resolution from a regulatory perspective, using a combination of new governance theory and equivalence functionalism to determine whether the European Union has adopted or is in the process of adopting a form of regulatory litigation. In so doing, the article considers a number of issues, including the basic definition of regulatory litigation, how class and collective relief can act as a regulatory mechanism and the special problems that arise when regulatory litigation is used in the transnational context. The article also includes a normative element, providing a number of suggestions on …
Ashes To Ashes: Comparative Law Regarding Survivors’ Disputes Concerning Cremation And Cremated Remains, Eloisa Rodriguez-Dod
Ashes To Ashes: Comparative Law Regarding Survivors’ Disputes Concerning Cremation And Cremated Remains, Eloisa Rodriguez-Dod
Faculty Publications
One should plan for unassuming post-mortem issues, as most state laws do not provide a complete framework when there is no testamentary instruction by the deceased. Judicial determination is often needed, however reported opinions are scarce. Final disposition issues also arise in foreign law. Spain has no civil code regarding disposition of a deceased but delegates its funerary laws to local governments and autonomous communities, while the French have established an order of priority for funerary decisions and provide for a judicial determination and stay of the funerary process in case of dispute.
The author gives a brief history of …
Enforcement Of Arbitral Awards Against Foreign States Or State Agencies, S. I. Strong
Enforcement Of Arbitral Awards Against Foreign States Or State Agencies, S. I. Strong
Faculty Publications
Britain's Lord Denning once said that “as a moth is drawn to the light, so is a litigant drawn to the United States.” Certainly, as a pro-arbitration state and a signatory to various international conventions concerning the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, the United States seems a natural place to bring an action to enforce an arbitral award against a foreign state or state agency. However, suing a sovereign has not traditionally been a simple task in the United States or elsewhere. Most nations grant foreign states the presumption of immunity, thus denying that their domestic courts have jurisdiction to …