Thứ Tư, 1 tháng 8, 2018

Auto news on Youtube Aug 1 2018

A proposal for a Regulation dealing with applicable law in divorce

was launched in July 2006 by the European Commission.

Negotiations proceeded on this proposal

until it became clear, in 2008,

that there were insurmountable difficulties

in securing the necessary unanimity for adoption by the Member States.

Shortly thereafter,

a group of Member States resumed the initiative

under the new arrangements for enhanced cooperation

in the Treaty for the Functioning of the European Union

and this led to the adoption of the Rome III Regulation

on this subject.

On and from June 21, 2012,

14 Member States became bound by the uniform rules on applicable law

as regards divorce and legal separation.

These were the original 15 States

which applied to cooperate in this enhanced procedure,

minus Greece which withdrew from the negotiations

and then subsequently gave notice of its intention

to be bound by the Regulation.

Lithuania is also now bound by the Regulation.

The Regulation excludes from material scope

a number of matters of family law,

similar to those excluded from the scope of the Brussels II-a Regulation,

many of which are now dealt with separately in other Regulations.

The Regulation is of universal character,

meaning that the law designated by this Regulation

shall apply whether or not it is the law of a Member State

participating in the Regulation.

In terms of the Regulation,

the parties are permitted to make a choice

between any of the following laws:

The law of the State of the habitual residence of the spouses

at the time the agreement to designate the law applicable is concluded;

The law of the State of their last habitual residence,

if one of the spouses is still residing there

at the time the agreement to designate the law applicable is concluded;

The law of the State of the nationality of either of the spouses

at the time the agreement to designate the law applicable is concluded;

Or the law of the <i>forum</i>.

An agreement designating the applicable law

may be concluded and modified at any time,

but at the latest at the time the court is seised.

Also, if the law of the <i>forum</i> so provides,

the spouses may also designate the law applicable

during the course of proceedings.

If they do the designation so made shall be recorded in court

in accordance with the law of the <i>forum</i>.

The material validity of a choice of law

is to be determined under the law which, in terms of the choice made,

would be applicable were the agreement to be valid.

The agreement on the choice of law has to be expressed in writing,

dated and signed by both spouses.

Other additional formal requirements for this type of agreement

may apply depending on the law of the Member State

of habitual residence of the spouses.

Where no choice of law has been made

the following rules shall apply to determine the law applicable,

the law of the State:

Where the spouses are habitually resident

at the time the court is seised;

Or, failing which where the spouses were last habitually resident,

provided that the period of residence did not end more than one year

before the court was seised,

in so far as one of the spouses still resides in that State

at the time the court is seised;

or, failing that of which both spouses are nationals

at the time the court is seised;

or, failing that where the court is seised.

Where the law applicable pursuant to the Regulation

makes no provision for divorce

or does not grant equal access to divorce or legal separation

because of the sex of one of the spouses,

the law of the <i>forum</i> shall apply.

The application of the law of a State refers to the rules of law

in force in that State

other than its rules of private international law.

A court may refuse to apply a provision of the law

designated in accordance with the provisions of the Regulation

only if such application is manifestly incompatible

with public policy of that <i>forum</i>.

The Regulation does not oblige the courts of a Member State

whose law does not provide for divorce

or does not deem a marriage to be valid

for the purposes of divorce proceedings

to pronounce a divorce by virtue of the application of the rules

in the Regulation.

For more infomation >> Applicable law in divorce – The Rome III regulation - Duration: 5:04.

-------------------------------------------

Art world mogul David Mugrabi files for divorce - Duration: 3:02.

 Art world mogul David Mugrabi and his wife Libbie Mugrabi are divorcing, Page Six has exclusively learned

 David's family is known for owning the world's largest collection of works by Andy Warhol — and their art holdings are said to be worth billions

 David filed for divorce, according to New York Supreme Court records, on Monday, but the papers in the matter are sealed

 Libbie has yet to respond in court papers — and we hear there's been a settlement offer made behind the scenes to keep the case from going forward

 Sources told Page Six that the couple, married for 13 years, had no prenup in place

 Libbie's power attorney William Zabel told Page Six when reached for comment: "She wants to negotiate an amicable settlement in order to protect her children financially

"  David is being repped by Blank Rome matrimonial legal eagle Lois Liberman.  Sources said that art world socialite Libbie's been living at the couple's home in the Hamptons

 "I don't think the marriage is salvageable," a pal told us.  The couple's been supremely private

 David reportedly met Libbie when she 21. They married three years later and now have two children

 It's unclear what their property assets are in Manhattan: One source said the couple had been in the process of renovating a house that they never moved into

 But another insider insisted the property does not belong to David, and that the pair only rented a different place in the city

 David's brother is the art world fixture Alberto "Tico" Mugrabi. Their dad is Israeli industrialist Jose Mugrabi

 Last year, David made headlines for suing a New Jersey storage facility for allegedly holding $100 million in art — including works by Warhol, Jean-Michel Basquiat and Damien Hirst — hostage over a payment dispute

 Artists including Enoc Perez and Richard Prince have reportedly made portraits of David's family

Không có nhận xét nào:

Đăng nhận xét