Search results

From Max-EuP 2012
Results 41 – 58 of 58
Advanced search

Search in namespaces:

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  • ...rtain readership. This judgment of the ECtHR led to a recalibration of the test for balancing privacy and freedom of expression under German law, with the
    20 KB (3,069 words) - 17:15, 14 September 2021
  • .... Another example is the delimitation of a market by the so-called ''SSNIP Test'' (small but significant and non-transitory increase in price) which allows
    20 KB (2,995 words) - 09:55, 10 August 2021
  • ...neral to the specific. If applied in reverse order, they form a three-step-test. In a first step, Annex I to the directive sets out a ‘Black List’ of 3
    21 KB (3,048 words) - 16:39, 23 September 2021
  • ...richment but rather protect the defendant by using an extremely subjective test of enrichment when the benefit was forced upon him.
    24 KB (3,789 words) - 10:31, 28 September 2021
  • ...oint a lead solicitor from among the parties’ attorneys or it can select a test case to be litigated in a kind of model proceeding. Compared with group act
    21 KB (3,088 words) - 09:44, 10 August 2021
  • ...del of regulation have been implemented in the shape of the Swiss Solvency Test (SST; see Art 9(2) Swiss VAG).
    23 KB (3,372 words) - 13:50, 31 August 2021
  • ...' [1979] ECR I-649, para 8). However, justification is subject to the test of proportionality so that there can be a justification only if the measure
    19 KB (2,836 words) - 14:52, 18 August 2021
  • ...st state (double deontology). The stricter law—provided that it passes the test of proportionality—is applicable if a conflict of laws arises. However, v
    21 KB (3,142 words) - 17:15, 2 September 2021
  • ... 1(1)) might be a little misleading in this respect. At any rate, the test of whether there was danger or more specifically imminent danger is a rigid
    23 KB (3,646 words) - 14:58, 21 September 2021
  • Trusts and their civil law equivalents (eg the ''Treuhand'' under German law) test the comparative law scholar’s imagination and ingenuity on how to cross t
    24 KB (3,679 words) - 15:10, 23 September 2021
  • ...ystem of property law. Furthermore, the restriction would have to pass the test of proportionality. However, judicial authority in this area of law does no
    25 KB (3,864 words) - 15:22, 14 October 2021
  • ...ls are being presented, inter alia, to replace the centre of main interest test and to provide specific provisions for corporate group insolvencies.
    25 KB (3,645 words) - 14:04, 24 August 2021
  • ...ural nor those of general economic policy satisfy the ‘overriding reasons’ test. Moreover, even where Member States try to invoke such reasons (eg the need
    23 KB (3,360 words) - 14:37, 18 August 2021
  • ...tention that stretches beyond this frequently depends on a proportionality test: if the partial breach of contract is serious enough to gain relevance for
    23 KB (3,370 words) - 11:57, 16 September 2021
  • ...e judicial review of contract terms is concerned, a general reasonableness test is applied in the Nordic legal systems to all contract terms, whereas other
    26 KB (3,919 words) - 09:01, 29 September 2021
  • ...so does not apply free of limitations. The ECJ tends to be strict with its test of necessity, which results in the frequent denial of justificatory reasons
    24 KB (3,645 words) - 10:47, 19 August 2021
  • ...ken seriously, at least the ‘burden of proof’ in the outcome-determinative test should be shifted, obliging the party which is relying on a procedurally ir
    26 KB (4,103 words) - 10:04, 18 August 2021
  • ...lly increased, not least due to EU legislation, and the courts developed a test for the fairness of [[Standard Contract Terms|standard contract terms]] tha
    25 KB (3,628 words) - 15:25, 14 October 2021

View (previous 20 | next 20) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

Retrieved from Special:Search – Max-EuP 2012 on 18 May 2024.

Terms of Use

The Max Planck Encyclopedia of European Private Law, published as a print work in 2012, has been made freely available in 2021 as an online edition at <max-eup2012.mpipriv.de>.

The materials published here are subject to exclusive rights of use as held by the Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law and the publisher Oxford University Press; they may only be used for non-commercial purposes. Users may download, print, and make copies of the text files being made freely available to the public. Further, users may translate excerpts of the entries and cite them in the context of academic work, provided that the following requirements are met:

  • Use for non-commercial purposes
  • The textual integrity of each entry and its elements is maintained
  • Citation of the online reference according to academic standards, indicating the author, keyword title, work name, and date of retrieval (see Suggested Citation Style).