No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Supreme Court, 3 September 1999
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 May 2009
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Netherlands Judicial Decisions Involving Questions of Private International Law
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 2000
References
1. Generally speaking, under Art. 4 of the Rome Convention, the legal system that applies to a contract is that of the country of the habitual residence of the party who performs, at the time the contract was entered into, the characteristic obligation.
2. HR 19 March 1909, Weekblad van het recht 8844.
3. See, inter alii: de Boer, Th.M. and Kotting, R., ‘Private International Law’, in J.J.M., Chorus, et al, eds., Introduction to Dutch Law for Foreign Lawyers, 3rd rev. edn. (The Hague, Kluwer Law International 1999) chapter 15, p. 282;Google ScholarGotzen, P., Eigentumsübertragung, Eigentumsvorbehalt und Sicherungsübereignung bei beweglichen Sachen in den Niederlanden und in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, ein rechtsvergleichende Darstellung unter Einschluss der kollisionsrechtlichen Fragen, dissertation (Münster 1971) p. 173;Google ScholarStrikwerda, L., Inleiding tot het Nederlandse Internationaal Privaatrecht (Groningen, Wolters-Noordhoff 1997) nos. 157, 159;Google Scholarvan Rooij, R. and Polak, M.V., Private International Law in The Netherlands (The Hague, T.M.C. Asser Instituut, Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers 1987) p. 157.Google Scholar
4. See about Art. 1583 of the Belgian Civil Code: Drobnig, U., ‘Transfer of Property’, in A., Hartkamp, et al. , eds., Towards a European Civil Code, 2nd rev. edn. (Nijmegen, Ars Aequi Libri; The Hague, Kluwer Law International 1998) pp. 497 et seq.Google Scholar
5. See n. 3.
6. Report on the Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations by Giuliano, M. and Lagarde, P., OJ 1980 C 282/10.Google Scholar
7. Staatscommissie voor het internationaal privaatrecht, Rapport aan de Minister van Justitie, Internationaal goederenrecht, November 1998, <www.minjust.nl/c_actual/persber/pb375.htm>.
8. Unoffical translation, Rapport van de Staatscommissie, pp. 13 et seq.
9. Rapport van de Staatscommissie, p. 17.
10. HR 4 June 1915, NJ 1915, 865; cf., H.U. Jessurun d'Oliveira, De antikiesregel, Een paar aspekten van de behandeling van buitenlands recht in het burgerlijk proces [The Anti-Choice Rule: A Few Aspects of Dealing with Foreign Law in Civil Procedures] (Deventer, Kluwer 1971) p. 33; P.M.M. Mostermans, De processuele behandeling van het conflictenrecht [Dealing with Conflicts of Law in Civil Proceedings] (Zwolle, W.E.J. Tjeenk Willink 1996) pp. 35, 37;Rodger, B.J. and van Doom, J., ‘Proof of Foreign Law: the Impact of the London Convention’, 46 ICLQ (1996) p. 154.Google Scholar
11. Mostermans, op. cit. n. 10, at pp. 57 et seq.
12. HR 9 November 1990, NJ 1992, 212. Also see: Hartley, T.C., ‘Pleading and Proof of Foreign Law: the Major European Systems Compared’, 45 ICLQ (1996) pp. 279 et seq.; Mostermans, op. cit. n. 10, at pp. 62 et seq.; Rodger and Van Doom, loc. cit. n. 10, at p. 154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. For an elaborate discussion of this Convention, see Rodger and Van Doom, loc. cit. n. 10.
14. Rodger, and Van Doom, , loc. cit. n. 10, at p. 165.Google Scholar
15. Heemskerk, W.H., Hoofdlijnen van Nederlands burgerlijk procesrecht [The Main Features of the Dutch Law of Civil Procedure], 19th edn. (The Hague, Vuga Uitgeverij 1998) no. 187; Mostermans, op. cit. n. 10, at pp. 58 et seq. Cf., Hartley, loc. cit. n. 12, at pp. 272 et seq.Google Scholar