Hans van Loon
Global private international law unification through multilateral treaties: (1) elevates the idea of justice pluralism to the global level; (2) orders the diversity of national and regional private international law systems, and creates permanent channels for direct transnational institutionalized cooperation among national administrations and courts around the world, thus ensuring continuity across borders of legal status and family and business relations established under national and regional laws; and (3) reflects globally recognized human and economic rights. Examples are given of the present transnational legal ordering role of Hague Conventions in the fields of family law, legal cooperation and commercial law, and of future possibilities for private international law instruments in support of global governance, such as facilitating access to foreign law; further ensuring continuity of personal status and family relations across borders; and linking private international law unification to the United Nations 2030 Agenda, in particular regarding the challenges of migration and environment and climate change.
Hans van Loon and David Sindres
The Wagner case stemmed from the non-recognition by Luxembourg of the adoption, in Peru, of a Peruvian child by a Luxembourg national. In November 1996, the Family Court of the province of Huamanga had pronounced the adoption in accordance with the legal conditions for full adoption in Peru, so that the child lost her family ties with her original family and acquired the status of daughter of the adopting parent, Ms. Wagner. Once in Luxembourg, Ms. Wagner, relying on the pre-existent judicial practice, expected the foreign adoption to be registered. However, that practice had been abolished and Ms. Wagner had to make an application before the District Court in order to obtain the enforcement (exequatur) of the foreign judgment. The enforcement would allow the child to acquire Luxembourgish nationality, and thereby European Union citizenship, and be granted definitive permission to remain in the country. In 1998, the Court dismissed the application for enforcement, based on the Luxembourg rules on the conflict of laws, which provide that the conditions for adoption are governed by the national law of the adoptive parent. According to Luxembourg’s Civil Code, an application for full adoption could only be made by a married couple. Ms. Wagner contested that the Court was dealing with an application for enforcement and not an application to adopt; and that the real issue consisted in the rights of the child adopted following the Peruvian judgment.