Search for: "PAMMER"
Results 21 - 32
of 32
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Sep 2011, 7:22 am
EBRAHIMI, An Overview of the Private International Law of Iran: Theory and Practice Adi CHEN, Conflict of Laws, Conflict of Mores and External Public Policy in Israel: Registration and Recognition of Foreign Divorce Decrees – A Modern Critique Court Decisions Michael BOGDAN, Website Accessibility as a Basis for Jurisdiction under Art. 15(1)(C) of the Brussels I Regulation – Case Note on the ECJ Judgments Pammer and Alpenhof Eva LEIN, Modern Art – The ECJ’s… [read post]
21 Dec 2012, 3:10 am
The ECJ held first in Pammer & Hotel Alpenhof that Article 15 should be interpreted in a similar manner, regardless of whether a consumer contract was concluded online. [read post]
14 Dec 2011, 3:15 am
C-585/08, Peter Pammer c/ Reederei Karl Schlüter GmbH & Co. [read post]
8 Dec 2010, 2:00 am
The European Court of Justice in its Judgment in Joined Cases C-585/08 and C-144/09 Peter Pammer v Reederei Karl Schlüter GmbH & Co. [read post]
27 Sep 2012, 2:39 pm
However, in the light of the ECJ’s Pammer and Alpenhof judgment in 2010 (in particular par. 86), the Austrian judges wanted to now whether only contracts concluded at a distance, and not on the spot, would fall within the scope of Article 15 (1) (c). [read post]
11 Jun 2019, 1:25 pm
In this context, the rest of the facts of the case, i.e percentage of the rooms in relation to overall number of rooms of the hotel in question, the degree of power imbalance of the parties, the rest of the services involved (see for example Pammer case C-585/08) cannot be ignored. [1] De Lima Pinheiro, in Magnus/ Mankowski Brussels I Regulation 2nd ed. [read post]
31 Aug 2021, 4:31 am
Although this clarification is consistent with the Pammer, Mühlleitner, Emrek and Hobohm judgments, the Author endorses a new interpretation of the directed-activity criterion by the Court of Justice of the European Union which would protect consumers and, at the same time, provide greater legal certainty for traders. [read post]
4 Oct 2013, 5:57 am
Article 5(3) lays down, as the sole condition, that a harmful event has occurred or may occur. 42 Thus, unlike Article 15(1)(c) of the Regulation, which was interpreted in Joined Cases C-585/08 and C-144/09 Pammer and Hotel Alpenhof [2010] ECR I-12527, Article 5(3) thereof does not require, in particular, that the activity concerned to be ‘directed to’ the Member State in which the court seised is situated.… [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 1:34 am
The ECJ refers to the case law it developed in trade mark law (case C-324/09 L’Oréal and Others, para. 64, but also joined cases C-585/08 and C-144/09 Pammer and Hotel Alpenhof, para. 69) to rule that the localisation of an act of re-utilisation depends on there being evidence that the act of re-utilisation discloses an intention to target persons in that territory. [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 1:34 am
The ECJ refers to the case law it developed in trade mark law (case C-324/09 L’Oréal and Others, para. 64, but also joined cases C-585/08 and C-144/09 Pammer and Hotel Alpenhof, para. 69) to rule that the localisation of an act of re-utilisation depends on there being evidence that the act of re-utilisation discloses an intention to target persons in that territory. [read post]
13 Jul 2009, 11:30 pm
Peter Pammer v. [read post]
8 May 2018, 6:37 am
Lord Justice Kitchin ran through jurisprudence including the CJEU’s decisions in Pammer (2010), L'Oréal v eBay (2011), and Nintendo (September 2017) along with the German Supreme Court’s Parfummarken (November 2017). [read post]
