Suchergebnisse

The fundamental principles in civil procedure do not only serve as guiding principles for civil procedure in general, but are especially relevant in the taking of evidence process. The German Code of Civil Procedure lays down various rules in its part on the taking of evidence, which aim to specify the scope of the fundamental procedural principles as well as their limitations. This reports purposes to depict the taking of evidence process under German law by illustrating its interaction with said principles.

Evidence — letters rogatory — public policy against extraterritorial applications of US lawMorgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP v. Gauthier (2006), 82 OR (3d) 189 (29 August 2006). Ontario Superior Court of Justice.The applicant MLB was a US law firm carrying on business principally in Philadelphia. It sought an order from the Ontario Superior Court of Justice giving effect to a letter of request issued by the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania. This court sought the assistance of the Ontario court in obtaining document production and testimony from the respondent, Claude Gauthier, a Canadian citizen resident in Ontario.

To that small band of faithful followers who are devoted to the unification of private international law, October 9 is a day to be commemorated with fetes and galas replete with jest and jollity. On that splendid day in 1986, the Senate of the United States by a vote of 98-0 gave its advice and consent to the ratification of four private law treaties:
the 1980 International Sales Convention;the 1980 International Child Abduction Convention;the 1975 Inter-American Convention on International Commercial Arbitration; andthe 1975 Inter-American Convention on Letters Rogatory with Additional Protocol.

(a) Customary practice. Under Federal law (Rule 28(b), Rules of Civil Procedure for the District Courts of the United States) and under the laws of some of the States, a commission to take depositions can be issued to a foreign official or to a private person in a foreign country. However, this method Is rarely used; commissions are generally issued to U.S. consular officers. In those countries where American consular officers are not permitted to take testimony (see 192.55(c)) and where depositions must be taken before a foreign authority, letters rogatory are usually issued to a foreign court.

This study is offering a review of the most important institutions of the Romanian law of evidence: the fundamental principles of civil procedure, as well as the general principles of evidence taking; an analysis of the various means of evidence, and of the rules regarding the taking of evidence; some specific issues such as the unlawful evidence, the costs, language and translation in the process of the taking of evidence, are also examined.

Act of State Doctrine and Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act Do Not Necessarily insulate a Foreign Government from Civil Liability for the Assassination of a Person on United States Soil - Liu v. Republic of China, slip op. No. 85-7461 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 11, 1986) Political Offense Exception does not Apply to Bar Extradition if Offenses are Committed Where no Uprising Exists--Quinn v. Robinson, 783 F.2d 776 (9th Cir. 1986). United States Courts have no Authority to Enforce Foreign Judgments when the Request for Judicial Assistance is made via Letters Rogatory Filed Directly in the Court, In Re Civil Rogatory Letters Filed by the Consulate of the United States of Mexico, 640 F. Supp. 243 (S.D. Tex. 1986). Federal District Court had Subject Matter and Personal Jurisdiction Under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act and the Alien Tort Claims Act in Action Against Soviet Union for Violation of Diplomatic Immunity, Von Dardel v. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, 623 F. Supp. 246 (D.C.D.C. 1985). Arbitrator's Order Reinstating with Backpay Two Undocumented Aliens was not Reviewable in Federal Court Because the Award did not Violate Public Policy and was Not in Disregard of the Law--Bevles Co. v. Teamsters Local 986, 791 F.2d 1391 (9th Cir. 1986).

This article describes and analyzes the reforms to the Federal Code of Civil Procedure in the following four areas: (1) application and proof of foreign law; (2) processing of letters rogatory; (3) international cooperation for the taking of evidence, and (4)enforcement of foreign judgments. The first part offers an overview and commentary on the very few provisions Mexico had enacted in the area of international procedural cooperation prior to the 1988 reform. Part two explores the legislative history of the 1988 amendments, emphasizing the objective and purpose of the legislative bills submitted to Congress by the President of Mexico. The third part proceeds to analyze the content of these unprecedented but important legislative changes. The article concludes with a series of final observations.

1International Court of Justice — Jurisdiction — Forum prorogatum — Rules of Court, Article 38(5) — Application of principle — Whether consent required to be given in particular form — Consent limited to claims formulated in Application — Events mentioned in the Application — Related events occurring after Application filedInternational Court of Justice — Procedure — Application — Rules of Court, Article 38(1) and (2) — Requirement that Application specify precise nature of claim, together with a succinct statement of the facts and grounds on which the claim is based — Whether particular form required — Application to be read as a wholeInternational criminal law — Mutual criminal assistance — Letters rogatory — Requirement to execute letter rogatory or give valid reasons for not doing so — Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, 1986, between Djibouti and France — Witness summonses addressed to head of State and senior officials by foreign courtState immunity — Jurisdictional immunity — Head of State — Senior officials of State — Personal immunity of Head of State — Duty to accord respect to Head of State — Whether issuance of witness summons requesting his testimony a violation of immunity — Whether senior officials entitled to benefit from State immunity

After a brief historical introduction, the short monograph reviews the system of evidence in Hungarian civil proceedings, approaching the topic from the aspect of the basic principles. Following changes in the role of material truth, it presents alterations in the interpretation of and re-interpretation of the notion of the principle of free disposition of the parties. Then it deals with the following basic principles and their relation to evidence: principle of orality, principle of directness, principle of public hearing, principle of equality of arms, right to be heard, ensuring the use of one's mother tongue, principle of procedural economy, the proper (bona fide) conduct of the lawsuit, principle of adversarial hearing, principle of the freedom of proof. After examining the questions of admissibility of evidence and burden of proof, it discusses particular means of evidence, the taking of evidence, the preliminary taking of evidence, costs of evidence, the question of unlawful evidence, and finally, the cross-border taking of evidence.

Introduction -- United States : deconstructing the FCPA -- Australia -- Brazil -- Canada -- China -- Cuba -- France -- Germany -- Guatemala -- India -- Indonesia -- Mexico -- Russia -- South Africa -- Tunisia -- The United Arab Emirates -- United Kingdom -- Carbon copy prosecutions -- The delicate task : a practice guide to investigating allegations of company-internal misconduct -- The key tools of the trade in transnational bribery investigations and prosecutions : Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLATS) and letters rogatory -- Global developments in, and evolution of, third party due diligence -- Investigations and privacy, and data security issues -- Increasing accountability and reducing corruption in the World Bank -- Anti-corruption system -- Corporate monitors and the monitorship process -- Corporate voluntary disclosures -- Deferred prosecution agreements, nonprosecution agreements, and corporate integrity agreements -- Company cooperation and U.S. sentencing guidelines -- Department of Justice's new revised FCPA corporate enforcement policy -- On the anti-bribery "watchlist" : compliance and labor/anti-trafficking issues

The text presents legal issues concerning evidence and evidence taking in Polish civil proceedings. General principles of Polish civil proceedings are discussed, as well as the principles concerning evidence. The evolution of Polish proceedings is obvious: it is getting more and more formal. The provisions about preclusion are presented in this context and the contradictory model of the proceedings is expressed strongly. There are some doubts if the evolution of Polish Code of Civil Proceedings goes in right direction. The problem of possible adoption of pre-trial regulations is also mentioned.

This publication is based on the Swedish report to the project Dimensions of Evidence in Civil Procedure. The major objective of the project has been to explore whether there exists a common core of European Law of Evidence, and if it does, to describe its content and its most important points of discord among the national legal systems. By providing a clear picture of common core principles, the project can serve as a starting point for further harmonisation or unification processes in this field. A basic assumption of the project is that there can be no trust without a clear picture what courts do in matters of evidence, and how they discover the facts. This publication presents the relevant aspects of the Swedish legal system. The Swedish system for adjunction seldom takes its ground in firmly defined principles, but principles appear in decisions ad hoc. The Swedish application of the principle of free production of evidence and the principle of free assessment of evidence are far-reaching.

Like in all jurisdictions of the Member States of the European Union the Slovak civil procedure is governed by the range of principles that were developed in Europe since 19th century. The thesis summarizes the main principles and their application by the judges when taking the evidence in the course of civil proceedings. It is evident that the observance of principles is vital not only in the drafting of legislation, but also in its implementation and claiming rights of the parties before the court. The combination of competing principles, such as free disposition principle and the officiality principle, as well as the adversarial and inquisitorial principles helps to achieve the situation in both positive law and the decision making practice of the courts, where it is possible to decide the civil cases in a fair and objective way enabling parties to use procedural tools at their disposal. The thesis further elaborates on role of principles in taking evidence at the court and it also describes the kinds and means of evidence according to the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure.