You are looking at 1 - 10 of 10 items

  • Author or Editor: SABINE CORNELOUP x
Clear All Modify Search
This content is available to you

Edited by Sabine Corneloup

This content is available to you

Edited by Sabine Corneloup

This content is available to you

Edited by Sabine Corneloup

This content is available to you

Sabine Corneloup

Cross-border disputes on family matters form part of the everyday litigation in the EU, with a number of 140,000 international divorces per year. Every time a case of a marriage breakdown involves more than one country, the legal analysis must start with an assessment of the State whose law shall apply. The EU has adopted the so-called ‘Rome III Regulation’, which provides uniform rules determining the law applicable to divorce and legal separation. It allows international couples to agree in advance on the applicable law, and in the absence of such a choice made by the spouses, it lays down common rules according to which the court determines the applicable law.

You do not have access to this content

Sabine Corneloup

This chapter provides commentary on Article 2 of the Rome III Regulation, the European Union Divorce Law Pact.

You do not have access to this content

Sabine Corneloup

This chapter provides commentary on Article 20 of the Rome III Regulation, the European Union Divorce Law Pact.

You do not have access to this content

Sabine Corneloup

This chapter provides commentary on Article 21 of the Rome III Regulation, the European Union Divorce Law Pact.

You do not have access to this content

Sabine Corneloup

This chapter provides a commentary of Article 8 of Regulations 2016/1103 and 1104.

You do not have access to this content

THE ROME III REGULATION

A Commentary on the Law Applicable to Divorce and Legal Separation

SABINE CORNELOUP

This comprehensive Commentary provides an in-depth, article-by-article analysis of the Rome III Regulation, the uniform rules adopted by the EU to determine the law applicable to cross-border divorce and legal separation. Written by a team of renowned experts, private international law scholars and practitioners alike will find this Commentary an incisive and useful point of reference.
You do not have access to this content

Sabine Corneloup and Jinske Verhellen

Kamasaee v. Commonwealth & Ors, also known as the Manus Island class action, is the largest settlement in the field of human rights in Australian legal history. The settlement marks a potentially important step for the recognition and application of migrants’ rights in the present context, where States go out of their way to avoid responsibilities towards refugees and asylum seekers. It arose out of the allegations of false imprisonments of refugees held at the Manus Island Regional Processing Centre between 21 November 2012 and 12 May 2016. The decision of the Supreme Court of Victoria to approve the settlement for compensation reached between the plaintiffs and the Australian Government in June 2017 came more than a year after the Supreme Court of Papua New Guinea had ruled that the centre was illegal and unconstitutional. In December 2014, Majid Karami Kamasaee, an Iranian refugee, brought an action against the Commonwealth of Australia and two other defendants for the failure to take reasonable care of people held at Manus Island Regional Processing Centre. He claimed damages for himself and almost 2,000 asylum seekers for the consequences arising out of their transfer from Australia and subsequent confinement in the centre located in the Los Negros Island in Papua New Guinea. According to Mr Kamasaee’s claim, the asylum seekers detained in the centre suffered physical and psychological injuries as a result of the Government’s negligence. Later on, a second claim for false imprisonment was also added.