| | SLO | ENG | Cookies and privacy

Bigger font | Smaller font
First page > Show document

Show document Help

Title:Stalno in običajno prebivališče kot kriterija za določitev mednarodne pristojnosti po Bruseljski uredbi I bis in Bruseljski uredbi II bis : diplomsko delo
Authors:ID Pintar, Anja (Author)
ID Repas, Martina (Mentor) More about this mentor... New window
Files:.pdf UN_Pintar_Anja_2019.pdf (463,47 KB)
MD5: 830B711A4158EC3B1A2E7B99C9154F4E
PID: 20.500.12556/dkum/8d289ba7-5b9c-4a09-a0ae-575bed8c134b
 
Language:Slovenian
Work type:Bachelor thesis/paper
Typology:2.11 - Undergraduate Thesis
Organization:PF - Faculty of Law
Abstract:V diplomskem delu obravnavam pojem stalnega ter običajnega prebivališča kot kriterija za določitev mednarodne pristojnosti po Bruseljski uredbi I bis in II bis. Razumevanje omenjenih pojmov se po posameznih državah in pravnih virih razlikuje. Stalno prebivališče toženca predstavlja v členu 4 Bruseljske uredbe I bis pojem, na katerem je utemeljena splošna mednarodna pristojnost. V nadaljevanju nas uredba v členu 62 napoti k uporabi nacionalnih pravil za opredelitev stalnega prebivališča fizične osebe, v členu 63 pa najdemo avtonomno razlago za opredelitev stalnega prebivališča pravne osebe. Pravila v Bruseljski uredbi II bis primarno temeljijo na državljanstvu in konceptu običajnega prebivališča, ki ga uredba ne definira. V diplomskem delu sem skušala primerjati ter najti povezave med opredelitvijo pojma običajnega prebivališča otroka in običajnega prebivališča odrasle osebe. Številne smernice, ki so se izoblikovale skozi sodno prakso Sodišča Evropske unije, je mogoče upoštevati pri opredelitvi obeh običajnih prebivališč, nekatere izmed smernic pa so primerne le za opredelitev enega izmed pojmov. V uredbi Rim I in Rim II so opredeljeni pojmi običajnega prebivališča za družbe in druge subjekte, s pravno osebnostjo ali brez nje ter fizične osebe, ki opravljajo poslovno dejavnost. Ne podajata pa opredelitvi za fizične osebe, ki ne opravljajo svoje poslovne dejavnosti. Zato bi se ta pojem moral razlagati smiselno v skladu s sodno prakso glede običajnega prebivališča v okviru drugih pravnih virov, predvsem Bruseljske uredbe II bis.
Keywords:stalno prebivališče, običajno prebivališče, Bruseljska uredba I bis, Bruseljska uredba II bis, uredba Rim I, uredba Rim II, dedna uredba
Place of publishing:Maribor
Place of performance:Maribor
Publisher:[A. Pintar]
Year of publishing:2019
Number of pages:22 f.
PID:20.500.12556/DKUM-75134 New window
UDC:341.2(043.2)
COBISS.SI-ID:5816875 New window
NUK URN:URN:SI:UM:DK:473NRVWS
Publication date in DKUM:12.12.2019
Views:1881
Downloads:326
Metadata:XML DC-XML DC-RDF
Categories:PF
:
Copy citation
  
Average score:(0 votes)
Your score:Voting is allowed only for logged in users.
Share:Bookmark and Share



Hover the mouse pointer over a document title to show the abstract or click on the title to get all document metadata.

Licences

License:CC BY-NC-ND 4.0, Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Link:http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Description:The most restrictive Creative Commons license. This only allows people to download and share the work for no commercial gain and for no other purposes.
Licensing start date:24.09.2019

Secondary language

Language:English
Title:Domicile and habitual residence as jurisdictional criteria in the Brussels I bis and II bis regulation
Abstract:This thesis, introduces the notion of domicile and habitual residence as criteria for determining international jurisdiction under the Brussels I bis and II bis Regulation. The understanding of these concepts varies from country to country and from different legal sources. General jurisdiction under the Brussels I bis Regulation is based on the defendant's domicile, determined by Article 4. In the case of an individual, Article 62 of the Regulation directs the Member States to apply their internal law. Article 63 on the other hand provides an autonomous interpretation approach. The rules in the Brussels II bis Regulation are primarily based on citizenship and the concept of habitual residence, which is not defined by the Regulation. One of the purposes of the thesis is to compare and connect the concept of child's habitual residence and habitual residence of an adult. The guidelines of Court of Justice of the European Communities (ECJ) are essential for defining both of the notions, however some of them are suitable only for one of the habitual residences. Rome I and Rome II Regulation define the concept of habitual residence for companies and other bodies, corporate or unincorporated and natural persons acting in the course of their business activity. Definition for natural persons who are not acting in the course of their business activity is not provided. Therefore, the concept of the habitual residence should be interpreted in accordance with the case law on habitual residence in the context of other sources of law, especially Brussels II bis Regulation.
Keywords:domicile, habitual residence, Brussels I bis Regulation, Brussels II bis Regulation, Rome I Regulation, Rome II Regulation, Succession Regulation


Comments

Leave comment

You must log in to leave a comment.

Comments (0)
0 - 0 / 0
 
There are no comments!

Back
Logos of partners University of Maribor University of Ljubljana University of Primorska University of Nova Gorica