It is a universally accepted principle that domestic courts are not allowed to enforce claims based on penal, revenue or other public laws of foreign states. Anatol Dutta shows that this principle, in common law the so-called Revenue Rule, is not only questionable from the viewpoint of legal policy but also lacks a basis in international law, constitutional law and national procedural law.
Anatol Dutta studies whether or not domestic courts should be allowed to enforce claims based on penal, revenue or other public laws of foreign states. Up to now, the answer to this has always been in the negative, the reason for this being a principle establishing the non-enforceability of such claims, in common law the so-called Revenue Rule. The author first analyzises this principle from a comparative perspective, after which he illustrates the the legal inadequacies of the non-enforceability principle. Although at first sight, the Revenue Rulemight seem justified by international law and constitutional law, neither of these grounds legitimate its application. Similarly, national procedural law fails to provide a basis for the Revenue Rule, in particular because international conventions as well as EC and EU law oblige the states to enforce some of their public law claims mutually. As the Revenue Rule does not act to bar the enforcement of public law claims, the author concludes by examining the conditions under which a court should enforce a foreign public law claim.
Autorentext
ist Inhaber des Lehrstuhls für Bürgerliches Recht, Internationales Privatrecht und Rechtsvergleichung an der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München.
Anatol Dutta studies whether or not domestic courts should be allowed to enforce claims based on penal, revenue or other public laws of foreign states. Up to now, the answer to this has always been in the negative, the reason for this being a principle establishing the non-enforceability of such claims, in common law the so-called Revenue Rule. The author first analyzises this principle from a comparative perspective, after which he illustrates the the legal inadequacies of the non-enforceability principle. Although at first sight, the Revenue Rulemight seem justified by international law and constitutional law, neither of these grounds legitimate its application. Similarly, national procedural law fails to provide a basis for the Revenue Rule, in particular because international conventions as well as EC and EU law oblige the states to enforce some of their public law claims mutually. As the Revenue Rule does not act to bar the enforcement of public law claims, the author concludes by examining the conditions under which a court should enforce a foreign public law claim.
Autorentext
ist Inhaber des Lehrstuhls für Bürgerliches Recht, Internationales Privatrecht und Rechtsvergleichung an der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München.
Titel
Die Durchsetzung öffentlichrechtlicher Forderungen ausländischer Staaten durch deutsche Gerichte
Autor
EAN
9783161583919
Format
E-Book (pdf)
Hersteller
Digitaler Kopierschutz
Adobe-DRM
Dateigrösse
36 MB
Anzahl Seiten
483
Lesemotiv
Unerwartete Verzögerung
Ups, ein Fehler ist aufgetreten. Bitte versuchen Sie es später noch einmal.