Cargando...
Fecha
2022-09-30
Derechos de acceso
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editorial
Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
Citas
Resumen
La sentencia del TJUE objeto de comentario acepta que, en principio, una sentencia judicial dictada “en los términos” de un laudo arbitral (judgment entered in terms of the award) pueda constituir una resolución judicial a los efectos de la aplicación del artículo 45.1 c/ del Reglamento Bruselas I refundido. Lo anterior condicionado a que tal sentencia reúna una serie de requisitos. Estos requisitos conforman y se aprecian en una suerte de test de equiparación respecto de una resolución “genuinamente europea” y se concretan en lo que el TJUE ha dado en calificar como “dos reglas fundamentales” del Reglamento: el efecto relativo del convenio arbitral y la litispendencia.
The judgment of the CJEU accepts that, in principle, a judgment entered in terms of the award may constitute a judicial decision for the purposes of the application of Article 45.1 c/ of the Brussels I Regulation recast. However, in order to be able to effectively attain such status, the judgment must necessarily meets a series of requirements. These requirements must be appreciated in a sort of test of equivalence with respect to a “genuinely European” decision and are specified in what the CJEU has described as “two fundamental rules” of the Regulation: the relative effect of the arbitration clause and lis pendens.
The judgment of the CJEU accepts that, in principle, a judgment entered in terms of the award may constitute a judicial decision for the purposes of the application of Article 45.1 c/ of the Brussels I Regulation recast. However, in order to be able to effectively attain such status, the judgment must necessarily meets a series of requirements. These requirements must be appreciated in a sort of test of equivalence with respect to a “genuinely European” decision and are specified in what the CJEU has described as “two fundamental rules” of the Regulation: the relative effect of the arbitration clause and lis pendens.
Descripción
La versión registrada de este artículo, publicado por primera vez en “Cuadernos de Derecho Transnacional 14(2), (2022), 1088-1099", está disponible en línea en el sitio web del editor: Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, https://doi.org/10.20318/cdt.2022.7222
The registered version of this article, first published in “Cuadernos de Derecho Transnacional 14(2), (2022), 1088-1099", is available online at the publisher's website: Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, https://doi.org/10.20318/cdt.2022.7222
The registered version of this article, first published in “Cuadernos de Derecho Transnacional 14(2), (2022), 1088-1099", is available online at the publisher's website: Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, https://doi.org/10.20318/cdt.2022.7222
Categorías UNESCO
Palabras clave
Arbitraje europeo, Reglamento Bruselas I refundido, Convenio arbitral, Laudo arbitral, Sentencia inconciliable, Litispendencia, Orden público, European arbitration, Regulation Brussels I recast, Arbitration clause, Arbitral award, Irreconcilable judgment, Lis pendens, Public policy
Citación
Gómez Jene, Miguel. (2022). "Prestige y Arbitraje europeo: a propósito de la sentencia London Steam-Ship del TJUE (asunto C-700/20)". Cuadernos de Derecho Transnacional 14(2): 1088-1099. doi: 10.20318/cdt.2022.7222
Centro
Facultad de Derecho
Departamento
Derecho de la Empresa