Einde inhoudsopgave
Verdrag betreffende de rechterlijke bevoegdheid, de erkenning en de tenuitvoerlegging van beslissingen in burgerlijke en handelszaken
Partijen en gegevens
Geldend
Geldend vanaf 01-01-2010
- Redactionele toelichting
Het Maandbericht van september 2011 is verwerkt. De teksten van de verklaringen, voorbehouden en bezwaren zijn afkomstig van de Verdragenbank op www.minbuza.nl.
- Bronpublicatie:
30-10-2007, PbEU 2009, L 147 (uitgifte: 10-06-2009, kamerstukken/regelingnummer: -)
- Inwerkingtreding
01-01-2010
- Bronpublicatie inwerkingtreding:
01-01-2010, Internet 2010, www.eda.admin.ch (uitgifte: 01-01-2010, kamerstukken/regelingnummer: -)
- Vakgebied(en)
Burgerlijk procesrecht / Beslag en executie
Internationaal privaatrecht / Internationaal bevoegdheidsrecht
Bronnen
PbEU 2007, L 339
PbEU 2009, L 147
PbEU 2014, L 18
PbEU 2017, L 16
PbEU 2017, L 57
Partijen
Partij | Datum inwerkingtreding | Voorbehoud |
---|---|---|
Denemarken | 01-01-2010 | |
EU (Europese Unie) | 01-01-2010 | |
IJsland | 01-05-2011 | |
Noorwegen | 01-01-2010 | |
Zwitserland | 01-01-2011 |
Voorbehouden, verklaringen en bezwaren
1 | De EU (Europese Unie) heeft op 18-05-2009 de volgende verklaring afgelegd: The European Community declares that in amending Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, it intends to clarify the areas to which article 22(4) of the aforesaid Regulation applies so as to take account of the relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Communities concerned with the registration or validity of intellectual property rights. These clarifications are intended to conform to article 22(4) of the Convention, while taking into account the results of the evaluation of the application of Regulation (EC) No 44/2001. The European Community declares that, in addition to the three Member States already referred to in Annex IX to the Convention, the following Member States may not institute proceedings under article 6(2) or article 11: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Slovenia. In accordance with article 77(2) of the Convention, as soon as the Convention enters into force the Standing Committee set up in accordance with article 4 of Protocol 2 to the Convention should thus be asked to amend Annex IX to the Convention to read as follows: The States and the rules referred to in Article II of Protocol 1 are the following: Germany: Articles 68, 72, 73 and 74 of the code of civil procedure (Zivilprozeszordnung) concerning third-party notices, Estonia: Article 214, paragraphs 3 and 4, and Article 216 of the code of civil procedure (tsiviilkohtumenetluse seadustik) concerning third-party notices, Latvia: Articles 78, 79, 80 and 81 of the code of civil procedure (Civilprocesa likums) concerning third-party notices, Lithuania: Article 47 of the code of civil procedure (Civilinio proceso kodeksas), Hungary: Articles 58 to 60 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Polgári perrendtartás) concerning third-party notices, Austria: Article 21 of the of the code of civil procedure (Zivilprozeszordnung) concerning third-party notices, Poland: Articles 84 and 85 of the code of civil procedure (Kodeks postepowania cywilnego) concerning third-party notices (przypozwanie), Slovenia: Article 204 of the code of civil procedure (Zakon o pravdnem postopku) concerning third-party notices, Switzerland, with respect to those cantons whose applicable code of civil procedure does not provide for the jurisdiction referred to in Articles 6(2) and 11 of the Convention: the appropriate provisions concerning third-party notices (litis denuntiatio) of the applicable code of civil procedure. . |
---|---|
2 | Ratificatie door Denemarken onder de volgende verklaring: Not applicable to the Faroes and Greenland. . |
3 | Ratificatie door Zwitserland onder de volgende verklaring: Pursuant to article I, paragraph 2 of Protocol 1, the Swiss Confederation reserves the right to require that documents originating from or addressed to Switzerland be sent by other means between public officers. Pursuant to article III, paragraph 1 of Protocol 1, the Swiss Confederation declares that it will not apply the following part of the provision in article 34(2): ‘unless the defendant failed to commence proceedings to challenge the judgment when it was possible for him to do so’. In Annex I referring to articles 3(2) and 4(2), the declaration by the Swiss Confederation should read as follows:
In Annex II referring to article 39(1), the declaration by the Swiss Confederation should read as follows:
In Annex III referring to article 43(2), the declaration by the Swiss Confederation should read as follows:
In Annex IV referring to article 44, however, the declaration by the Swiss Confederation is confirmed, as follows:
In Annex IX referring to article II of Protocol 1, the declaration of the Swiss Confederation should be considered to have been deleted. . |