|
|
|
|
| LEADER |
12159nam 2200541 u 4500 |
| 001 |
VR001040134 |
| 003 |
VRH01000000000000001021588 |
| 008 |
t s2018 r ||| eng |
| 007 |
tu||||||||||||||||||||| |
| 020 |
|
|
|a 978-0-19-882911-9
|c hardback : £125.00
|
| 020 |
|
|
|a 0198829116
|
| 090 |
|
|
|a EG XVI A 71
|
| 100 |
1 |
|
|a Ligeti, Katalin <<[HerausgeberIn]>>
|
| 110 |
|
|
|a European Law Institute <<[Herausgebendes Organ]>>
|
| 245 |
0 |
0 |
|a Preventing and resolving conflicts of jurisdiction in EU criminal law
|b a European Law Institute instrument
|c Katalin Ligeti, John Vervaele, André Klip, ELI reporters ; with articles edited by Katalin Ligeti, Gavin Robinson
|
| 250 |
|
|
|a First Edition
|
| 260 |
|
|
|a Oxford
|b Oxford University Press
|c 2018, 2018
|
| 300 |
|
|
|a xxviii, 333 Seiten : Illustrationen
|
| 655 |
|
|
|a Aufsatzsammlung
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Vervaele, John A. E. <<[HerausgeberIn]>>
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Klip, André <<[HerausgeberIn]>>
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Robinson, Gavin <<[HerausgeberIn]>>
|
| 041 |
0 |
7 |
|a eng
|2 ISO 639-2
|
| 993 |
|
|
|a toc
|
| 993 |
|
|
|a 1902
|
| 024 |
8 |
|
|a 9780198829119
|
| 024 |
3 |
|
|a 9780198829119
|
| 084 |
|
|
|a EG: XVI A
|
| 998 |
|
|
|a EG: XVI A
|
| 998 |
|
|
|a Strafrecht: Gesamtdarstellung.
|
| 998 |
|
|
|a EG: XVI A
|
| 697 |
|
|
|a ELI
|
| 696 |
|
|
|a Vervaele, J. A. E.
|
| 696 |
|
|
|a Vervaele, John Alois Emericus
|
| 696 |
|
|
|a Vervaele, John A.
|
| 696 |
|
|
|a Vervaele, John
|
| 696 |
|
|
|a Klip, Andries Huibert
|
| 696 |
|
|
|a Klip, A. H.
|
| 696 |
|
|
|a Klip, André H.
|
| 856 |
|
|
|u https://aleph.mpg.de:443/F?func=service&doc_library=VRH01&local_base=VRH01&doc_number=001021588&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA
|3 ToC
|m Völkerrecht Heidelberg
|z VIEW
|
| 992 |
|
|
|a PREVENTING AND RESOLVING CONFLICTS OF JURISDICTION IN EU CRIMINAL LAW A EUROPEAN LAW INSTITUTE INSTRUMENT KATALIN LIGETI | JOHN VERVAELE | ANDRE KLIP ELI REPORTERS WITH ARTICLES EDITED BY KATALIN LIGETI | GAVIN ROBINSON Y OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS CONTENTS TABLE OF CASES XVII TABLE OF LEGISLATION XXI PART I: INSTRUMENT OF THE EUROPEAN LAW INSTITUTE 1 KATALIN LIGETI, JOHN VERVAELE, AND ANDRE KLIP (ELI REPORTERS) PREFACE TO PART I 3 FRANK MEYER DRAFT LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS FOR THE PREVENTION AND RESOLUTION OF CONFLICTS OF JURISDICTION IN CRIMINAL MATTERS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION 12 PART II: PREVENTING AND RESOLVING CONFLICTS OF JURISDICTION IN EU CRIMINAL LAW 77 EDITED BY KATALIN LIGETI AND GAVIN ROBINSON PREFACE TO PART II 79 PAULO PINTO DE ALBUQUERQUE INTRODUCTION TO THE ARTICLES 83 KATALIN LIGETI AND GAVIN ROBINSON 1. REPORT ON THE FIELD RESEARCH AT EUROJUST, FEBRUARY 2015 86 ANGELO MARIETTA PRELIMINARY NOTE 86 I. INTRODUCTION 86 II. SUMMARY OF FIELD RESEARCH 87 A. THE LEGAL ROLE OF EUROJUST 87 B. PARALLEL PROCEEDINGS 89 1. THE NATURE OF PARALLEL PROCEEDINGS 89 2. DETECTION OF PARALLEL PROCEEDINGS 89 3. PARALLEL INVESTIGATIONS AND THE ROLE OF JITS IN THE PREVENTION OF CONFLICTS OF JURISDICTION 91 C. RESOLUTION OF CONFLICTS OF JURISDICTION 92 1. DECIDING ON WHICH JURISDICTION SHOULD PROSECUTE 92 2. CRITERIA TO DETERMINE JURISDICTION 93 3. IN PARTICULAR: THE AVOIDANCE OF NE BIS IN IDEM CASES 94 4. THE ACTUAL TRANSFER OF PROCEEDINGS 95 D. SUMMARY 96 III. ANNEX: QUESTIONNAIRE 98 XI CONTENTS 2. THE LEGAL BASIS FOR PREVENTING AND RESOLVING CONFLICTS OF CRIMINAL JURISDICTION IN THE TFEU 100 MARTIN WASMEIER I. INTRODUCTION 100 II. ARTICLE 82(1 )(B) TFEU*CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVES 102 A. APPROXIMATION OF LAWS UNDER ARTICLE 82(1 )(B) TFEU? 104 B. THE NOTION OF*CONFLICTS OF JURISDICTION* 107 C. *NEGATIVE CONFLICTS* OF JURISDICTION AND MULTIPLE PROCEEDINGS 110 III. SETTLEMENT OF CONFLICTS VIA EUROJUST*ARTICLE 85( 1 )(C) TFEU 112
|
| 992 |
|
|
|a IV. CONCLUSIONS REGARDING THE LEGISLATIVE MODELS DEVELOPED IN THIS PROJECT 115 3. PREVENTION AND SETTLEMENT OF CONFLICTS OF JURISDICTION (SPANISH SYSTEM) 119 MIGUEL CARMONA RUANO I. SETTLEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS OF JURISDICTION IN SPANISH LAW 119 A. TRADITIONAL LACK OF RULES ABOUT SETTLEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS OF JURISDICTION 119 B. LACK OF RULES ABOUT TRANSFERRING AWAY OF JURISDICTION FROM SPANISH COURTS 120 II. SETTLEMENT OF INTERNAL CONFLICTS OF JURISDICTION 122 III. THE DEFINITION OF SPANISH JURISDICTION IN CRIMINAL MATTERS 122 IV. THE PRINCIPLE OF UNIVERSAL JURISDICTION AND ITS EVOLUTION IN SPANISH LAW 125 V. CONVENTION NO 73 OF THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE ON THE TRANSFER OF PROCEEDINGS 131 VI. LAYING OF INFORMATION, ARTICLE 21 OF CONVENTION NO 30 OF THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE ON MUTUAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS 1959 132 VII. CASES OF TRANSFER OF JURISDICTION 133 VIII. FRAMEWORK DECISION ON PREVENTION AND SETTLEMENT OF CONFLICTS OF JURISDICTION AND ITS TRANSPOSITION INTO SPANISH LAW 135 IX. CONCLUSION 138 4. FORUM CHOICE IN THE AREA OF FREEDOM, SECURITY, AND JUSTICE 140 ANGELO MARIETTA I. INTRODUCTION: JURISDICTION, CONFLICTS, AND CHOICES IN THE AREA OF FREEDOM, SECURITY, AND JUSTICE 140 II. PRE-LISBON APPROACH AND AD HOC CONSULTATION PROCEDURES 141 III. THE CURRENT EU LEGAL FRAMEWORK: FD 2009/948/JHA 145 IV. THE CURRENT LEGAL FRAMEWORK: THE EUROJUST DECISION AND THE EUROJUST GUIDELINES 148 A. THE EUROJUST DECISION 148 XII CONTENTS B. THE EUROJUST GUIDELINES 150 V. ASSESSMENT OF THE CURRENT LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN LIGHT OF THE RELEVANT FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS STANDARDS 154 A. CHOICE OF FORUM AND THE PRINCIPLE OF THE LAWFUL JUDGE 154 B. CHOICE OF FORUM AS A PROCESS: THE IMPORTANCE OF PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS 156 VI. CONCLUSION: SOME CONSIDERATIONS ON THE CJCL PROPOSALS 157 5. FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS PROTECTION BETWEEN STRASBOURG AND LUXEMBOURG: EXTENDING TRANSNATIONAL NE BIS IN IDEM ACROSS ADMINISTRATIVE AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURES 160 KATALIN LIGETI I. INTRODUCTION 160
|
| 992 |
|
|
|a II. EUROPEAN NE BIS IN IDEM: LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND RATIONALES 161 III. THE CONCEPTUAL ROOTS OF EXTENDED NE BIS IN IDEM 164 A. THE ENGEL DOCTRINE AND THE CONCEPT OF A 'CRIMINAL CHARGE* 164 B. THE BROAD, FACTUAL CONCEPT OF IDEM 167 IV. THE TWO COURTS AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF EXTENDED NE BIS IN IDEM 170 A. AKERBERG FRANSSON AND GRANDE STEVENS: APPLYING THE ENGEL CRITERIA IN THE CONTEXT OF NE BIS IN IDEM 170 B. ENGINES ASTERN? THE NEW APPROACH OF THE ECTHR TO EXTENDED NE BIS IN IDEM IN A AND B V NORWAY 172 C. CASE CLOSED? THE CJEU AND EXTENDED NE BIS IN IDEM IN THE AFTERMATH OF A AND B V NORWAY: MENCI, DI PUMA, AND GARLSSON 175 V. CONCLUSIONS: TRANSNATIONAL APPLICATION OF EXTENDED NE BIS IN IDEM AND CONFLICTS OF JURISDICTION 180 6. CHOICE OF FORUM AND CYBERCRIME 182 GAVIN ROBINSON I. IS CYBERSPACE CONFLICT-PRONE? 182 A. DEFINITIONS OF CYBERCRIME 182 B. A GENERATOR OF MULTIPLE CLAIMS TO JURISDICTION 184 II. CONFLICTS OF SUBSTANTIVE JURISDICTION IN CYBERSPACE 186 A. RULES FOUNDING SUBSTANTIVE CYBER-JURISDICTION 188 1. TERRITORIALITY 188 2. EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION 191 B. EXISTING EFFORTS TO CONFRONT CONFLICTS OF JURISDICTION 193 1. INTERNATIONAL AND EUROPEAN INITIATIVES 193 2. EUROPEAN JUDICIAL COOPERATION ON CYBERCRIME 195 III. IMPROVING FORUM CHOICE IN CYBERCRIME CASES 198 A. INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION 198 B. DEFENDANTS IN CYBERCRIME CASES 200 C. VICTIMS IN CYBERCRIME CASES 202 XIII CONTENTS 7. CONFLICTS OF JURISDICTION IN CRIMINAL LAW: LESSONS FROM EUROPEAN CIVIL PROCEDURE 204 PIETRO ORTOLANI I. INTRODUCTION 204 II. SCOPE AND LIMITS OF THE COMPARISON: STRUCTURAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CIVIL AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE 205 A. PROCEDURAL ARCHITECTURE AND PARTY IMPULSE 205 B. RELEVANCE OF THE PROBLEM OF INACTIVITY 206 C. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JURISDICTION AND APPLICABLE LAW 207 D. THE ROLE OF PRIVATE AUTONOMY 208 E. THE INFLUENCE OF FACT-SPECIFICITY 209 III. LESSONS FROM PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW IN GENERAL 209 A. CONFLICTS OF JURISDICTION AS CONFLICTS OF SOVEREIGNTY 209
|
| 992 |
|
|
|a B. THE IMPORTANCE OF LEGAL CERTAINTY AND PREDICTABILITY IN PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW 211 C. SUBSTANCE-NEUTRALITY AS A CORNERSTONE OF PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW 213 1. INTRODUCTION TO THE NOTION OF SUBSTANCE-NEUTRALITY 213 2. APPLICATION OF SUBSTANCE-NEUTRALITY TO CRIMINAL JUSTICE 213 IV. LESSONS FROM EUROPEAN CIVIL PROCEDURE IN PARTICULAR 216 A. REDUCING OVERLAPS IN JURISDICTION 216 B. DIFFERENT HEADS OF JURISDICTION IN THE BRUSSELS I SYSTEM 218 1. GENERAL JURISDICTION 218 2. SPECIFIC JURISDICTION: THE CASE OF TORT 219 3. DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN PLACE WHERE THE DAMAGE OCCURRED AND PLACE OF THE HARMFUL EVENTS 220 4. CROSS-BORDER EVENTS 221 5. CIVIL CLAIMS BASED ON AN ACT GIVING RISE TO CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS 223 6. EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION 223 C. PUTTING THE LIS PENDENS MECHANISM IN CONTEXT 224 D. LESSONS FROM CONFLICTS OF JURISDICTION IN FAMILY AND SUCCESSION MATTERS 226 1. DEALING WITH FACT-SPECIFICITY WHILE SAFEGUARDING CERTAINTY 226 2. ORDERING THE CRITERIA PROGRESSIVELY 227 3. LAWFUL MOVE AND CHILD ABDUCTION: IS A COMPARISON WITH ARREST POSSIBLE? 229 4. EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION: THE ROLE OF CENTRAL AUTHORITIES 230 V. CONCLUSIONS 230 8. MUTUAL RECOGNITION, CHOICE OF FORUM, AND LIS PENDENS: A CIVIL LAW THREESOME TRANSPOSED 232 AUKJE VAN HOEK I. INTRODUCTION 232 II. MUTUAL RECOGNITION AS PRINCIPLE OR GOAL 234 III. STANDARD REQUIREMENTS FOR (MUTUAL) RECOGNITION OF CIVIL JUDGMENTS 234 XIV 1 CONTENTS IV. TRAITE SIMPLE, DOUBLE, AND MIXTE 237 V. THE LOCUS DELICTI IN CIVIL JUSTICE CASE LAW 240 VI. LIS PENDENS AND RELATED ACTIONS*DEALING WITH PARALLEL PROCEEDINGS UNDER BRUSSELS I BIS 246 VII. PARALLEL PROCEEDINGS IN CIVIL AND CRIMINAL LAW*SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES 248 9. CHOICE OF FORUM, EUROPEAN CITIZENSHIP, AND FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS: THE POSITION OF THE DEFENDANT 251 MICHIEL LUCHTMAN I. INTRODUCTION 251 II. CHOICE OF FORUM AND EU COOPERATION IN CRIMINAL MATTERS 253 A. JURISDICTION 255 B. REFUSAL GROUNDS IN COOPERATION INSTRUMENTS 256
|
| 992 |
|
|
|a C. EXISTING MECHANISMS FOR DEALING WITH CONFLICTS OF JURISDICTION 258 III. CHOICE OF FORUM AND EUROPEAN CITIZENSHIP 260 IV. CHOICE OF FORUM, EUROPEAN CITIZENSHIP, AND FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS 265 A. LEX CERTA 266 1. FRAGMENTED HARMONISATION OF CRIMINAL LAW JURISDICTION: DIVERGENT CRIMINAL LAW SYSTEMS 268 2. THE FORESEEABILITY OF THE DOUBLE BURDEN 268 3. THE QUEST FOR VIABLE ALTERNATIVES 269 B. TRIBUNAL ESTABLISHED BY LAW 270 1. THE QUEST FOR REASONABLENESS 271 2. THE NEED TO BREAK OPEN NATIONAL LAW 273 3. THE NEED TO COORDINATE NATIONAL LEGAL SYSTEMS 274 C. NE BIS IN IDEM 277 V. CONCLUSIONS 279 10. WHAT ROLE FOR CRIME VICTIMS IN THE FORUM CHOICE? 283 MICHELE SIMONATO I. INTRODUCTION 283 II. A PRELIMINARY ISSUE: WHO IS A VICTIM? 285 III. THE SCOPE OF VICTIMS* RIGHTS IN THE EU 286 IV. MULTIPLE LEGITIMATE JURISDICTIONS: WHAT IS THE PROBLEM (FOR VICTIMS)? 289 V. THE INTERESTS OF VICTIMS IN THE CHOICE OF ONE FORUM 291 A. HOW ARE VICTIMS* INTERESTS CURRENTLY CONSIDERED? 291 B. TOWARDS A NEW INSTRUMENT: WHAT TYPE OF VICTIMS* INTERESTS? 292 C. A HIERARCHY BETWEEN DIFFERENT INTERESTS? 294 D. WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF EU CITIZENSHIP? 300 VI. CONCLUSIONS 302 XV CONTENTS 11. CHOICE OF FORUM AND CASE ALLOCATION IN THE EPPO REGULATION 305 HANS-HOLGER HERRNFELD I. INTRODUCTION 305 II. BACKGROUND*SOME BASIC ELEMENTS OF THE EPPO REGULATION 306 A. STRUCTURE OF THE EPPO 306 B. LEGAL REGIME APPLICABLE TO EPPO INVESTIGATIONS AND PROSECUTIONS 307 1. SUBSIDIARY APPLICATION OF THE NATIONAL LAW OF THE MEMBER STATE WHERE THE INVESTIGATION IS CONDUCTED 307 2. APPLICATION OF NATIONAL LAW ON INVESTIGATIVE MEASURES 308 3. APPLICATION OF NATIONAL LAW IN CROSS-BORDER INVESTIGATIONS 309 4. SUBSTANTIVE NATIONAL LAW 310 5. COMPETENCES OF THE EPPO 311 III. CONFLICTS OF JURISDICTION AND CASE ALLOCATION WITHIN THE EPPO AND THE EPPO TERRITORY 312 A. CHOICE OF JURISDICTION IN A*SINGLE OFFICE* 312 B. DECISION-MAKING PROCESS AND CRITERIA FORESEEN IN THE EPPO REGULATION 314
|
| 992 |
|
|
|a C. JUDICIAL REVIEW OF EPPO DECISIONS ON CASE ALLOCATION AND FORUM CHOICES 315 IV. CONFLICTS OF COMPETENCE BETWEEN THE EPPO AND NATIONAL AUTHORITIES 318 A. POSSIBLE CONFLICTS IN CASE OF PARTICIPATING MEMBER STATES 319 B. POSSIBLE CONFLICTS OF JURISDICTION IN RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE EPPO AND NON-PARTICIPATING MEMBER STATES 321 V. CONCLUSION 322 INDEX 323
|
| 852 |
|
|
|c EG: XVI A: 71
|m BOOK
|
| 999 |
|
|
|a VRH50
|b MPVRH
|c Institutsbibliothek
|d EG: XVI A: 71
|e available
|t Verfügbar
|f 1
|g 0
|h N
|i 3
|j BIB
|k i
|
