Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T21:44:46.796Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Australia and the Hague Conference on Private International Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2009

Michael Pryles
Get access

Extract

At a reception in The Hague a few years ago the Burgomaster remarked that there was something in the air of that wonderful city which was conducive to international law. Certainly no other city comes close to The Hague in terms of its pre-eminence in matters of international law, both public and private. The Hague is the seat of the International Court of Justice, the Hague Academy of International Law, the T.M.C. Asser Institute and others. Countless conventions on public and private international law have been concluded at The Hague. One of the oldest institutions, and not the least grandest, is the Hague Conference on Private International Law. This venerable body of distinguished lineage has had a significant influence on the principles of private international law throughout the world including Australia.

Type
Articles
Information
Netherlands International Law Review , Volume 40 , Issue 1 , May 1993 , pp. 107 - 114
Copyright
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. See generally Sykes, E.I. and Pryles, M.C., Australian Private International Law, 3rd edn. (1991) at pp. 460–485.Google Scholar

2. See Sykes and Pryles, ibid., at pp. 419–437.

3. 11th edn. (1987) p. 595 (this quotation does not appear in the later 12th edition).

4. (1989) FKC 92/054.

5. See In the marriage of Soares (1989) FLC 992–024.Google Scholar

6. In the marriage of Brandon (1990) FLC 92–153.Google Scholar

7. (1989) FLC 92–001. See generally Sykes, and Pryles, , op. cit. n. 1, pp. 542–546.Google Scholar

8. See Sykes, and Pryles, , op. cit. n. 1, pp. 493–498.Google Scholar

9. Vita Food Products Inc. v. Unus Shipping Co. [1939Rsqb; A.C. 277.Google Scholar

10. See especially Evidence, pp. 475–476, 477, 478–479, 481, 485, 486–487.

11. E.g., Evidence, p. 478.Google Scholar

12. E.g., Evidence, p. 483.Google Scholar

13. E.g., Evidence, pp. 483, 486.Google Scholar

14. See, e.g., Augustus v. Permanent Trustee Co. (Canberra) Ltd. (1971) 124Google Scholar CLR 245. See generally Sykes, and Pryles, , op. cit. n. 1, chap. 22.Google Scholar