Search for: "Uden v. State" Results 1 - 11 of 11
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Feb 2009, 5:34 am
Schlosser Report, para 64; Van Uden, para 32), it should have made this clear and explained its reasoning in greater detail. [read post]
21 Feb 2011, 2:53 pm
If question 4 is answered in the affirmative, what facts or circumstances are then required in order to be able to accept that there is a real connecting link, as referred to in paragraph 40 of the Van Uden v Deco-Line judgment [Case C-391/95], between the subject-matter of the measures sought and the territorial jurisdiction of the Contracting State of the court before which those measures are sought? [read post]
20 Mar 2010, 3:13 pm by Marta Requejo
 C-391/95, Van Uden, where “provisional” was said to indicate “return to the original status quo”. [read post]
13 Jul 2012, 1:52 am
616/10 Solvay SA v Honeywell Fluorine Products Europe BV, Honeywell Belgium NV and Honeywell Europe NV, a reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank ‘s-Gravenhage (Netherlands), shows an impressive turn of pace for the Court of Justice. [read post]
14 Feb 2010, 2:36 pm by Martin George
Accordingly, the proposals provide for an exclusive head of jurisdiction for court proceedings supporting arbitration in the civil courts of the Member States and the corresponding obligation of the courts in all other Member States to transfer parallel litigation to the courts of the Member State where the arbitration takes place. [read post]
11 Jul 2009, 2:19 am
Considering the previous judgments in Marc Rich, van Uden and Turner as well as the civil law approach of the Regulation, the West Tankers judgment does not come as a surprise. [read post]
5 Jun 2020, 10:08 am by Krzysztof Pacula
Further, in Van Uden, the Court held that “provisional measures are not in principle ancillary to arbitration proceedings but are ordered in parallel to such proceedings and are intended as measures of support. [read post]