Jurisdiction to Adjudicate: A Suggested Analysis

Conflicts of laws unbounded: the case for a legal-pluralist revival

“…219 Nevertheless, many examples comes to mind in which various established jurisdictions have adopted various forms of lateral or reflexive thinking, produced hybrids in the course of accommodating colliding sets of rules or have sought to acknowledge the compliance pull of informal practices. Among these, in addition to the instance involving proportionality cited above, 220 one might cite the case of Jivraj, in which a religious arbitration clause was contested as discriminatory under EU employment legislation; 221 or James Elliott Construction, 222 in which the ECJ is called upon for the first time to interpret technical standards; 223 or again, the recent Claudia Pechstein case, in which compulsory arbitration in sports disputes is pitted against competition law in the German courts. 224 However, the last word will be for a particularly remarkable example, which acknowledges the conflicts between expanding autonomous regimes, and proposes an equally pluralist response.…”

Global competition law framework: A private international law solution needed

“…A need for taking evidence in one country in support of proceedings in another country may often arise in competition cases. Von Mehren and Trautman 195 have noted that "adjudicatory action of one jurisdiction, if it is to be fully effective, will often require the cooperation of other jurisdictions." 196 The rules designed to deal with the parallel proceedings would be particularly important in this context.…”

“…201 Another important issue, which is to be considered when devising a global competition law regime based on co-operation between the various competition law systems relates to the question "whether and how choice-of-law practices should be taken into account in the formulation of rules governing the assumption of adjudicatory jurisdiction." 202 Given the public policy character of most competition law provisions (and their mandatory nature in particular), the traditional private international theories which presuppose "the selection of a single governing law for resolution of multistate disputes" 203 may not produce satisfactory results in cases where there are competition law infringements which are often global in nature. In such cases, the problems may be dealt with by "recourse to special substantive rules which would seek to adjust, on a basis of equality, the views of all legitimately concerned jurisdictions.…”

The Impact of the European Convention on Human Rights on Private International Law

“…43 The doctrine is generally regarded as a bar to a State's (non)-assertion of jurisdiction under international law, and although its exact content is not clearly defined, it is generally thought to pertain only to gross or manifest instances of injustices. 41 Von Mehren and Trautman 1966, p. 1127. 45 What gross or manifest injustices exactly entail, though, is not clear.…”