No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 February 2019
The subject of this contribution is the influence of Swiss Private International Law (PIL) on the Italian codification. This topic could be regarded as rather old-fashioned. One of the terms of the comparison, the Italian statute of private international law, goes back to May 1995 and the other, the Swiss PIL Act, is even older, almost “prehistoric” since it was adopted in 1987 and entered into force on the 1st January 1989, that means in an era which preceded the advent of the Internet and the “Information Society.” Not even the idea of comparing these two pieces of legislation is an entirely new one, since a very accurate comparative analysis of the two codifications has already been done by Mr. Dutoit, professor of PIL and comparative law at the University of Lausanne, in an article of 1997.
1 Act No. 218 of 31 May 1995. For a more complete analysis of this text see Ballarino, T. and Bonomi, A., “The Italian Statute on Private International Law of 1995,” in Yearbook of Private International Law 2000, pp. 99–131, and Pocar, F. and Honorati, C., ‘Italy’ (National Report), in Symeonides, S. C. (ed.), Private International Law at the End of the 20 th Century: Progress or Regress?, XVth International Congress of Comparative Law, The Hague-London-Boston 2000, pp. 279–294.Google Scholar
2 “Federal Act on Private International Law of 18 December 1987,” in Recueil systématique du droit fédéral, No. 291.Google Scholar
3 Dutoit, B., “Deux loi récentes de droit international privé : jusqu'où la Suisse et l'Italie convergent-elles?,” in Collisio legum. Studi di diritto internazionale privato per Gerardo Broggini, Milano 1997, pp. 137–168.Google Scholar
4 For the most recent developments, see the website of the Hague Conference, at the address: http://www.hcch.net.Google Scholar
5 This competence is provided for in the new Art. 65 of the EC-Treaty, according to which: “Measures in the field of judicial cooperation in civil matters having cross-border implications, to be taken in accordance with Article 67 and insofar as necessary for the proper functioning of the internal market, shall includeGoogle Scholar
6 Kohler, Ch., “Interrogations sur les sources du droit international privé européen après le traité d'Amsterdam,” in Revue critique de droit international privé 1999, pp. 1–30.Google Scholar
7 Regulation No. 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceeding; Regulation No. 1347/2000 of 29 May 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility for children of both spouse; Regulation No 1348/2000 of 29 May 2000 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters; Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters; Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001 of 28 May 2001 on cooperation between the courts of the Member States in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters.Google Scholar
8 COM/2002/159 final and COM/2002/222 final.Google Scholar
9 Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, signed in Lugano on 16 September 1988.Google Scholar
10 See the comment of Hohloch, G. and Kjelland, C., “The New German Conflict Rules for Registered Partnership,” in Yearbook of Private International Law 2001, pp. 223–235.Google Scholar
11 See Šarcevic, P., “The New Yugoslav Private International Law Act,” in Am. J. Comp. L. 33 (1985) 283–296.Google Scholar
12 “Private International Law and Procedure Act 1999,” in Official Journal of the Republic of Slovenia, No. 56/99.Google Scholar
13 See Parra-Aranguren, G. E., “The Venezuelan Act on Private International Law of 1998,” in Yearbook of Private International Law 1999, pp. 103–117.Google Scholar
14 See Yearbook of Private International Law 2001, pp. 349–390.Google Scholar
15 I put this expression in brackets, because I don't think it is used in English. When in French we speak about “densité normative”, what we intend is the more or less detailed and comprehensive character of the regulation.Google Scholar
16 As it is well known, Art. 1(2) of the Swiss civil code recognizes the power of the judge to fill the gaps by acting “as legislator.”Google Scholar
17 See Art. 104 and 132 of the Swiss Act. Google Scholar
18 See Art. 7(1) of the Rome Convention and Art. 19 of the Swiss statute.Google Scholar