Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  autonomous interpretation
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Remarks on Language and International Law

100%
Wiśniewski A.
Adam Mickiewicz University Law Review
|
2022
|
vol. 14
57-83
EN
The main assumption behind this study is that the relationship between language and international law is particularly interesting due to the complexity and special nature of this relationship when compared to national law. The author focuses on some selected issues connected with the fact that from the legal point of view the multiplicity of languages in international law is an important factor affecting its interpretation. Due to this, apart from the issue of the dominant position of the English language in international law, the major focus of the study is on the specific problems associated with the interpretation of international treaties. The study suggests that there are certain intrinsic tensions and contradictions involved in the relationship between language and international law. The dominant position of English language in international law is at odds with the principle of sovereign equality laid down in the UN Charter, which entails equal opportunities for all nations to participate in the global legal discourse. Moreover, the interpretation of plurilingual treaties involves significant problems when it comes to the interpretation of authentic texts made in various languages, which need to be reconciled. In turn, the tensions between the meaning of terms used in international legal norms and their corresponding meaning in national legislation are addressed through the use of the autonomous method of interpretation. Moreover, considering the growing importance of the legitimacy of international law, the role of the language of international law in this context is also considered. The problems related to the problems of language in the context of international law outlined in this study confirm the need for further continuous and in-depth research in this field.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Kwalifikacja w prawie prywatnym międzynarodowym Unii Europejskiej. Od kwalifikacji autonomicznej ku… kwalifikacji według kolizyjnej legis fori?

89%
Pacuła K.
Problemy Prawa Prywatnego Międzynarodowego
|
2019
|
vol. 25
107-122
EN
The terms ‘characterization’ (‘classification’) and ‘exercise of characterization’ refer in particular to the efforts made to determine which conflict of law rule - and in the sense presented in this paper, also rule on jurisdiction - which is part of the law of the forum State, should be applied to the circumstances of a particular case. In relation to the norms of private international law of the European Union, the triumph of an autonomous characterization at first sight seems undeniable. The term autonomous characterization (in principle - ‘autonomous interpretation’, the case law usually does not distinguish between exercise of characterization and exercise of interpretation) has been referred to over the last fifty years in order to describe the vast majority of operations of interpretation undertaken in relation to the norms of EU private international law. The contemporary concept of characterization in private law of the European Union, although consistently referred to as ‘autonomous’, does not fully meet the criteria thereof. The papers argues that while the starting point was the autonomous characterization in its pure form (stage one), over time it partially gave way to the place of characterization according to the EU law-oriented legis fori (stage two), and finally it was enriched with new elements which gave it the form of a specific functional characterization (stage three). It is not so much about the consistency of the results of the exercises of characterization with the universal understanding of certain concepts. Exercises of characterization are carried out through the prism of their effects, so as to ensure the effectiveness of the norms of EU law (effet utile) other than rules on conflict of laws and on jurisdiction.
3
Content available remote

Influence of sources of international law on the interpretation of EU law

75%
Bělohlávek A. J., Šamlot J.
The Lawyer Quarterly
|
2024
|
vol. 14
|
issue 2
157-178
EN
In the interpretation of EU law as well as international law, the autonomous interpretation is well established. It is, however, still necessary to reflect the specific nature of EU law and of international law and the resulting interaction between these two groups of sources of law. For international treaties in particular, the question arises of how the treaties affect autonomous interpretation. This article thus aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of the possible influence of international law, in particular international treaties, on the interpretation of EU law.
4
Content available remote

Význam a pojetí obvyklého pobytu (nejen) v evropském mezinárodním právu soukromém a procesním. Habilitační přednáška

51%
Drličková K.
Právník. Teoretický časopis pro otázky státu a práva (The Lawyer - Scientific Review for Problems of State and Law)
|
2021
|
vol. 160
|
issue 6
466-476
EN
The aim of this article is to analyse the importance and conception of habitual residence especially in the European private international law. In the regulations of European private international law, habitual residence appears as a connecting factor determining applicable law as well as a criterion determining international jurisdiction of courts. Habitual residence of other natural persons (not acting in the course of their business activity) is not defined in European private international law. The interpretation of the concept of habitual residence is autonomous. A uniform conception of habitual residence within the framework of European private international law exists as regards the basic characteristics of this institute. Habitual residence constitutes factual relationship to a particular place and must be determined on the basis of an assessment of all circumstances of each case. Habitual residence represents the centre of a person’s vital interests. However, in determining habitual residence, account must be taken to the specifics of the regulation in question, to the governed legal relationships as well as to the legal status of a person concerned. The physical presence of a person in the given state is necessary for the existence of habitual residence. However, the mere physical presence in a particular state is not enough. Integration in the social environment must also be present. The intention of a person to reside in the given state for a long time and to establish a permanent or usual centre of vital interests there is not a necessary or decisive condition for establishing habitual residence. Given the nature of habitual residence, a situation should not arise where a person does not have any habitual residence. For purpose of the rules of European private international law, it is always necessary to determine only one habitual residence of a person concerned.
CS
Cílem článku je analýza významu a pojetí obvyklého pobytu především v evropském mezinárodním právu soukromém a procesním. V předpisech evropského mezinárodního práva soukromého a procesního figuruje obvyklý pobyt jako hraniční určovatel i jako kritérium pro určení mezinárodní příslušnosti soudů. Obvyklý pobyt ostatních fyzických osob (nejednajících při výkonu podnikatelské činnosti) není v rámci evropského mezinárodního práva soukromého a procesního definován. Výklad pojmu obvyklý pobyt je autonomní. O jednotné koncepci obvyklého pobytu v rámci evropského mezinárodního práva soukromého a procesního lze hovořit, pokud jde o základní charakteristiku tohoto institutu. Obvyklý pobyt představuje faktický vztah k určitému místu a musí být určen na základě posouzení všech konkrétních skutkových okolností v každém jednotlivém případě. Obvyklý pobyt má představovat centrum životních zájmů osoby. Při určování obvyklého pobytu je však třeba vzít v potaz specifika příslušné právní úpravy, upravených právních poměrů a postavení dotčené osoby. Pro existenci obvyklého pobytu je nezbytná fyzická přítomnost osoby v daném státě. Pouhá fyzická přítomnost v určitém státě nestačí. Musí být přítomna i integrace v rámci sociálního prostředí. Úmysl osoby v daném státě dlouhodobě pobývat a zřídit si tam trvalé či obvyklé centrum zájmů není nezbytnou či rozhodující podmínkou pro založení obvyklého pobytu. S ohledem na povahu obvyklého pobytu by neměla nastat situace, kdy osoba obvyklý pobyt nemá. Pro účely předpisů evropského mezinárodního práva soukromého a procesního je třeba určit vždy právě jeden obvyklý pobyt.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.