conflicts of laws

Is Pinckney Dangerous Law?

I wanted to post this comment since CJEU in October this year handed its perplexing Pinckney C-170/12 ruling. When this Thursday Advocate General Jääskinen published its opinion in Coty Prestige C-360/12, I felt obliged to go back to its confusing language and arguments and point out why Pinckney is a bad law. My regular readers

CJEU Receives a New Case on Online Copyright Infringement & Jurisdiction

The UK IPO reports a new interesting preliminary reference on cross border jurisdiction in copyright law before the Court of Justice of the EU – Hejduk C-441/13. As Pinckley C-170/12 case is very likely to be rejected by the CJEU due to speculation of referring French court, it is good to know that similar questions

Some Exciting CJEU References

Today somewhat more copyright oriented post. It seems that interesting references for preliminary rulings before the Court of Justice of EU are definitely not on the decrease. Except for the older pending ones, which I list here, consider this fantastic set of cases. Copyright limitations, such as private copying exemption and library use exemption, but

CJEU: Pinckney Case Questions

As Kluwer Copyright blog already reported on the beginning of this month, French Cour de cassation filed several very interesting questions before the Court of Justice of EU in preliminary reference Pinckney C-170/12. UK IPO yesterday send to its subscribers this very helpful information, that also include complete version of the preliminary questions. BackgroundThe applicant

Hidden Gems of L’Oreal v. eBay

Some of you might be wondering why Huťko did not report on two most interesting CJEU cases of this beautiful summer – L´Oréal v. eBay C-324/09 and Interflora C-323/09. The main reason is the complexity of said cases. Summing them up in two separate articles would be just not enough to cover everything. And after

GA’s Opinion in L´Oreal v. Ebay

Huťko is very excited about the opinion of Advocate General Jääskinen in L´Oreal v. Ebay C-324/09 published this Thursday (9th of December). The case is so complex and deals with so many interesting questions that Huťko deems it even more intriguing reading than Google France C-236/08. So far Huťko has identified these interesting (sometimes hidden)

When Does the Website “Direct” its Activity to Consumer’s Country?

Court of Justice just rendered decision in two joint cases Pammer C‑585/08 and Hotel Alpenhof C‑144/09 dealing with the issue of international private law on the internet, more precisely question of jurisdiction over consumer contracts. Following articles are references to provisions of Regulation No. 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in