- Tytuł:
- The Notion of “Court” under the Succession Regulation
- Autorzy:
- Wilderspin, Michael
- Powiązania:
- https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1029997.pdf
- Data publikacji:
- 2020-06-29
- Wydawca:
- Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego
- Tematy:
-
EU Succession Regulation
the notion of “court”
authentic instruments
judicial body
competent authority - Opis:
- The article concerns the notion of “court” in the Succession Regulation. This notion is used in the Brussels I and Brussels Ia Regulations, where it does not necessarily have the same scope. The author attempts to interpret the concept in the light of the recitals to the Succession Regulation (in particular Recital 20) and of the case law of the Court of Justice. The very general description of the concept contained in Article 3(2) of the Regulation might potentially embrace other authorities and legal professionals, where they exercise judicial functions by way of delegation of power from the court. In the author’s view, the European Court, especially in Oberle and WB v Notariusz Przemysława Bac correctly navigated its way through the Succession Regulation and ruled in a way which is both coherent as regards the operation of the Regulation and consistent with the intentions of the legislator. The above judgments are analysed also with regard to Poland’s omission to notify notaries as “courts” under Article 79 of the Succession Regulation. The European Court found that the criteria for determining whether an authority or a legal professional, in particular a notary public, constitutes a “court” aredetermined by Article 3(2) and not by Article 79. Consequently, Poland’s omission to notify was not conclusive, but was in any event correct in substance. The author expresses the opinion that the judgment is accurate on this point.
- Źródło:
-
Problemy Prawa Prywatnego Międzynarodowego; 2020, 26; 45-56
1896-7604
2353-9852 - Pojawia się w:
- Problemy Prawa Prywatnego Międzynarodowego
- Dostawca treści:
- Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł