The current project of the Hague Conference on Private International Law has reached a critical juncture that requires careful consideration of the terms that delineate the scope of the proposed convention. Work to date has not followed the mandate of the Council on General Affairs and Policy to produce a convention that would deal with concurrent proceedings, understood as including pure parallel proceedings and related actions. In two previous articles we have addressed the practical needs that should be addressed by the concurrent proceedings project and the general architecture of such a convention. The process is now mired in terminological confusion that has hampered progress on a practical result. Differing interpretations of the directions given to those doing the work has led to situations in which the participants have been speaking past each other. In this article, we provide a reminder of the common law/civil law divergence of approaches to concurrent litigation; review the approach taken in the EU’s Brussels I (Recast) Regulation and the problems it has created; and offer suggestions regarding the proper scope and architecture of a global convention addressing the problem of concurrent proceedings.
Paul Herrup & Ronald A. Brand,
A Further Look at a Hague Convention on Concurrent Proceedings,
Available at: https://scholarship.law.pitt.edu/fac_articles/573
Civil Procedure Commons, Commercial Law Commons, Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Conflict of Laws Commons, Courts Commons, Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Commons, International Law Commons, International Trade Law Commons, Jurisdiction Commons, Law and Economics Commons, Litigation Commons, Transnational Law Commons