Join for free
Page 3 of 8 < 1 2 3 4 5 > Last »
Zaphod's Avatar
Zaphod
Senior Member
Zaphod is offline
Lincs UK
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 3,990
Zaphod is male  Zaphod has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
19-04-2021, 08:33 AM
21

Re: Brussels opposes UK entry to the Lugano Convention legal pact

Originally Posted by Banchory ->
So you are inferring other members of the forum are fools who wouldnít understand that the U.K. not being granted accession to the Lugano convention has reciprocal implications. Most disingenuous of you
Tut tut tut, I'm only saying that one person here is a fool and now is being disingenuous too as they try to accuse me of being in their desperate squirming attempts to try and prove what cannot be proven.

Originally Posted by Banchory ->
Hereís comment from the LCoC Director
Twitter comment?
From a known EUrophile?
One that has been proven wrong with his Brexit warnings so many times already and is widely-pilloried for his pro-EU stance?
Righty-ho - not of course that this is you being disingenuous there.
No sir.


Originally Posted by Banchory ->
Seems The Spectator are still feigning fake indignation at being treated as a third country and still want to have their cake and eat it.
Or they could just be pointing out reality.
That thing you seem not to be able to grasp.
Look at the POV of a group of lawyers and digest.

"The 2005 Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements does offer some protection to exclusive jurisdiction clauses..."
"Generally, the Hague Convention demands that the courts of contracting states give effect to exclusive jurisdiction clauses in favour of the courts of other contracting states. Judgments handed down in line with such clauses must be recognised and enforced."
https://www.simmons-simmons.com/en/p...-so-what-next-
Zaphod's Avatar
Zaphod
Senior Member
Zaphod is offline
Lincs UK
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 3,990
Zaphod is male  Zaphod has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
19-04-2021, 08:35 AM
22

Re: Brussels opposes UK entry to the Lugano Convention legal pact

Originally Posted by Solasch ->
If a consumer/buyer has a dispute with firm in, let's say, italy, he can take that firm to court in the UK. The ruling of the court has to be enforced by the firm in italy.
At least, if the UK is member of the lugano convention. If not,

The buyer has to travel to italy, hire a local barrister, and then can take the firm to court in italy. The ruling of the court will be based on italian law, and the british buyer has to abide by it.
And the whole thing works equally in reverse too.
Solasch's Avatar
Solasch
Chatterbox
Solasch is offline
Netherlands
Joined: Sep 2018
Posts: 8,963
Solasch is male  Solasch has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
19-04-2021, 11:08 AM
23

Re: Brussels opposes UK entry to the Lugano Convention legal pact

Originally Posted by Zaphod ->
"The 2005 Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements does offer some protection to exclusive jurisdiction clauses..."
https://www.simmons-simmons.com/en/p...-so-what-next-
And that quote of you goes on to state:

though not to any other kind of jurisdiction clause (eg non-exclusive or asymmetric, where one party is limited to bringing proceedings in one court, but the other is not). There is also some uncertainty about whether the Hague Convention applies to contracts entered into before 1 January 2021, when the UK rejoined independently of the EU.
Zaphod's Avatar
Zaphod
Senior Member
Zaphod is offline
Lincs UK
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 3,990
Zaphod is male  Zaphod has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
19-04-2021, 12:13 PM
24

Re: Brussels opposes UK entry to the Lugano Convention legal pact

Originally Posted by Solasch ->
And that quote of you goes on to state:

though not to any other kind of jurisdiction clause (eg non-exclusive or asymmetric, where one party is limited to bringing proceedings in one court, but the other is not). There is also some uncertainty about whether the Hague Convention applies to contracts entered into before 1 January 2021, when the UK rejoined independently of the EU.
What does it go on to say after that, Solly (and BTW people can read if they're visiting here you know)?

"Looking ahead there is a another international instrument that might be of assistance. The 2019 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters is in the pipeline and would establish an international framework for the recognition and enforcement of judgments. "

Yes it says it'll take time.
So what?
In the context of this thread that is neither here nor there since everything takes time.
Zaphod's Avatar
Zaphod
Senior Member
Zaphod is offline
Lincs UK
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 3,990
Zaphod is male  Zaphod has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
20-04-2021, 08:34 AM
25

Re: Brussels opposes UK entry to the Lugano Convention legal pact

Originally Posted by Banchory ->
Try it was you who claimed that not stating the obvious would misleads members of the forum not I. You can squirm as much as you like but you just dig yourself an even bigger hole

Oh dear, did I post a link to a Twitter post from someone you donít like just because you perceive him as pro EU and doesnít fit your agenda.

The Spectator and reality? Donít think so but donít let me stop you believing it.
There's only one person here digging holes and it ain't me.
Would these suit you better?

Because you're obviously not interested in reasoned discussion, as per usual for you.

We can go on posting links from wherever until the end of time but it makes zero difference to the subject of the topic, and no matter what you think your point is (if anybody cares or remembers any more) the basics remain unalterable.

Yes the UK applied to join the Lugarno convention, just as we did with pretty much every other similar thing upon leaving the EU.

But whether we are admitted or not makes very little difference because it isn't necessary, as proven by the fact that no other similar agreements are in force.

Bread's Avatar
Bread
Chatterbox
Bread is offline
Sudbury, United Kingdom
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 10,656
Bread is male  Bread has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
20-04-2021, 12:56 PM
26

Re: Brussels opposes UK entry to the Lugano Convention legal pact

Hmmm......

My thoughts are that the UK joining the Lugano Convention is to avoid the unnecessary updating of contracts on both sides to put which judiciary any dispute would be resolved by, instead of just referencing and leveraging the Lugano Convention.

There are millions of contracts which are in place between between the 27+ EFTA and the UK. When they were written they would have used the Lugano convention to describe cross border disputes and judiciaries (the whole point of a convention) but now we have left the Lugano Convention these contracts will all need to be updated to put the UK the as the judiciary for disputes (contracts originated on our side), and similarly the 27 will have to update their contracts to be the jurisdiction for contracts on their side (the Lugano Convention only applies between states who the Convention applies to ....).

An easy fix to resolve the massive amount of updates needed to the judiciary for all these existing contracts, is to allow the UK to be included as a Lugano state and continue to use the convention so then the contracts can stay as they are without re-wording them and costing a load of money in legal fees for doing the updates.

Otherwise there needs to be an overarching agreement that includes the UK as an "equivalent" Lugano state outside the Lugano convention or the 27 and the UK have a lot of needless document updates to do - this could be a viable alternative (if the idiots in Brussel see common sense - which I doubt), which could even be made be temporary until a existing contract expires or gets updated as part of a company's renewal process.

New contracts would declare which country is the judiciary for disputes anyway so this shouldn't be the problem, it's all the ones that existed before we left the Lugano Convention when we also left the EU.
Banchory
Senior Member
Banchory is offline
Kent
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 1,207
Banchory is male  Banchory has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
22-04-2021, 07:48 AM
27

Re: Brussels opposes UK entry to the Lugano Convention legal pact

Originally Posted by Bread ->
Hmmm......

My thoughts are that the UK joining the Lugano Convention is to avoid the unnecessary updating of contracts on both sides to put which judiciary any dispute would be resolved by, instead of just referencing and leveraging the Lugano Convention.

There are millions of contracts which are in place between between the 27+ EFTA and the UK. When they were written they would have used the Lugano convention to describe cross border disputes and judiciaries (the whole point of a convention) but now we have left the Lugano Convention these contracts will all need to be updated to put the UK the as the judiciary for disputes (contracts originated on our side), and similarly the 27 will have to update their contracts to be the jurisdiction for contracts on their side (the Lugano Convention only applies between states who the Convention applies to ....).

An easy fix to resolve the massive amount of updates needed to the judiciary for all these existing contracts, is to allow the UK to be included as a Lugano state and continue to use the convention so then the contracts can stay as they are without re-wording them and costing a load of money in legal fees for doing the updates.

Otherwise there needs to be an overarching agreement that includes the UK as an "equivalent" Lugano state outside the Lugano convention or the 27 and the UK have a lot of needless document updates to do - this could be a viable alternative (if the idiots in Brussel see common sense - which I doubt), which could even be made be temporary until a existing contract expires or gets updated as part of a company's renewal process.

New contracts would declare which country is the judiciary for disputes anyway so this shouldn't be the problem, it's all the ones that existed before we left the Lugano Convention when we also left the EU.
Contracts define which countries law the contract is administered under and have Tís & Cís to cover disputes. However should disputes move into litigation the Lugano Convention has benefits, particularly for small companies.

The principle losers if we are not part of the Lugano convention will be consumers who will only be able to seek redress in the courts of foreign countries.

With one of the principles of Brexit being divergence of laws and standards away from the EU it may be that such divergence would make administration of the convention unworkable and we will have to rely on how we deal with disputes with the rest of the world.
Zaphod's Avatar
Zaphod
Senior Member
Zaphod is offline
Lincs UK
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 3,990
Zaphod is male  Zaphod has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
22-04-2021, 08:14 AM
28

Re: Brussels opposes UK entry to the Lugano Convention legal pact

Originally Posted by Banchory ->
Contracts define which countries law the contract is administered under and have Tís & Cís to cover disputes. However should disputes move into litigation the Lugano Convention has benefits, particularly for small companies.

The principle losers if we are not part of the Lugano convention will be consumers who will only be able to seek redress in the courts of foreign countries.

With one of the principles of Brexit being divergence of laws and standards away from the EU it may be that such divergence would make administration of the convention unworkable and we will have to rely on how we deal with disputes with the rest of the world.
Which is how we already deal with disputes from around the world, and it can't be such a bad option since our trade with the rest of the world has been increasing in recent years whereas our trade with the EU has been decreasing.
Bread's Avatar
Bread
Chatterbox
Bread is offline
Sudbury, United Kingdom
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 10,656
Bread is male  Bread has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
22-04-2021, 09:34 AM
29

Re: Brussels opposes UK entry to the Lugano Convention legal pact

Originally Posted by Banchory ->
Contracts define which countries law the contract is administered under and have Tís & Cís to cover disputes. However should disputes move into litigation the Lugano Convention has benefits, particularly for small companies.

The principle losers if we are not part of the Lugano convention will be consumers who will only be able to seek redress in the courts of foreign countries.

With one of the principles of Brexit being divergence of laws and standards away from the EU it may be that such divergence would make administration of the convention unworkable and we will have to rely on how we deal with disputes with the rest of the world.

Its a convention. The judiciary is declared on the contracts - legacy ones reference the lugano convention on both UK and other lugano convention states which need to he updated.

The rules and standards of the judiciary are different all over the world including within the EU as there are regional variations in all sorts of areas such as opening times.

It's updates to paperwork that's all , or not if the EU allows the UK to be recognised as a lugano state to avoid a lot of needless effort on both sides.

This is a typical mountain from a mole hill.
Banchory
Senior Member
Banchory is offline
Kent
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 1,207
Banchory is male  Banchory has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
22-04-2021, 10:49 AM
30

Re: Brussels opposes UK entry to the Lugano Convention legal pact

Originally Posted by Bread ->
Its a convention. The judiciary is declared on the contracts - legacy ones reference the lugano convention on both UK and other lugano convention states which need to he updated.

The rules and standards of the judiciary are different all over the world including within the EU as there are regional variations in all sorts of areas such as opening times.

It's updates to paperwork that's all , or not if the EU allows the UK to be recognised as a lugano state to avoid a lot of needless effort on both sides.

This is a typical mountain from a mole hill.
Why do you think contracts would reference the Lugano Convention?

Iíve let many contracts for supply or works and as the client The choice is either either English or Scottish law with most being under English law. No need to mention the Lugano Convention at all.

The only changes to paperwork would most likely be at government level but that would be a minor element of the Brexit related changes that will need to be undertaken

The losers are joe public who will lose access to a simpler method of legal redress
 
Page 3 of 8 < 1 2 3 4 5 > Last »

Thread Tools


© Copyright 2009, Over50sForum   Contact Us | Over 50s Forum! | Archive | Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Top

Powered by vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.