Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T10:29:09.620Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Recent Developments in Private International Law in the Americas

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2009

Gonzalo Parra-Aranguren
Get access

Extract

The Charter of the Organization of American States, approved in 1948, assigned to the Inter-American Council of Jurists, among other functions, the task of promoting ‘the development and the codification of international law’ (Article 67). Therefore, on September 6, 1949, the Inter-American Juridical Committee, which was the Permanent Commission of the Council (Article 68), presented a Report that favoured the revision of the Bustamante Code, taking into account the Montevideo Treaties and the American Restatement of Conflict of Laws.

Type
Articles
Information
Netherlands International Law Review , Volume 39 , Issue 2 , August 1992 , pp. 229 - 241
Copyright
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Conferencias Internationales Americanos. Segundo Suplemento (1945–1954) (1956) p. 136.Google Scholar

2. The Inter-American Council of Jurists had its seat in Rio de Janeiro and was to meet periodically. It was composed of Representatives of the Contracting States and the Inter-American Juridical Committee, originally with seven Members. However, the Inter-American Council of Jurists was suppressed by the Protocol of Buenos Aires, signed in 1967, modifying the Charter of the Organization of die American States. See Parra-Aranguren, G.. ‘La Revisión del C6digo Bustamante’, Codificación el Derecho International Privado en America (1982) pp. 199–295.Google Scholar

3. The First Inter-American Specialized Conference on Private International Law (CIDIP-I) took place in Panama, and on January 30,1975, the following Conventions were signed: (a) Inter-American Convention on Conflicts of Laws concerning Bills of Exchange, Promissory Notes and Invoices; (b) Inter-American Convention on Conflicts of Laws concerning Checks; (c) Inter-American Convention oninternational Commercial Arbitration; (d) Inter-American Convention on Letters Rogatory; (e) Inter- American Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad; and (d) Inter-American Convention on the Legal Regime of Powers of Attorney to be Used Abroad. See G. Parra-Aranguren, ‘Recent Developments of Conflict of Laws Conventions in Latin America’, 169 Hague Recueil (1979-III) pp. 107–127.

4. Four years later the Second Inter-American Specialized Conference on Private International Law (CIDIP-II) was held in Montevideo (Uruguay), and on May 8,1979, the following Conventions were signed: (a) Inter-American Convention on Extraterritorial Validity of Foreign Judgements and Arbitral Awards; (b) Inter-American Convention on Execution of Preventive Measures; (c) Inter-American Convention on Proof of and Information of Foreign Law; (d) Additional Protocol to the Inter-American Convention on Letters Rogatory; (e) Inter-American Convention on Conflict of Laws concerning Checks; (f) Liter-American Convention on Domicile of Natural Persons in Private International Law; and (h) Inter-American Convention on General Rules of Private International Law. See Parra-Aranguren, , loc. cit. n. 3, pp. 128–157.Google Scholar

5. Third Inter-American Specialized Conference on Private International Law (CIDIP-III) met in La Paz(Bolivia),and on April 24,1984Google Scholar, the following Conventions were signed: (a) Additional Protocol to the Inter-American Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad; (b) Inter-American Convention on Jurisdiction in the International Sphere far the Extraterritorial Validity of Foreign Judgements; (c) Inter-American Convention onPersonality and Capacity of Juridical Persons in Private International Law; and (d) Inter-American Convention on Conflicts of Laws concerning the Adoption of Minors. See Parra-Aranguren, G.. ‘Codification in America with Particular Reference to me Third Specialized Inter-American Conference on Private International Law (CIDIP-III) (La Paz, 1984)’, International Law at the Time of its Codification. Essays in Honour of Roberto Ago, Vol. IV (1987) pp. 227–247.Google Scholar

6. The Fourth Inter-American Specialized Conference on Private International Law took place inMontevideo,and on July I5, 1989Google Scholar, the following Conventions were signed: (a) Inter-American Convention on the International Return of Children; (b) Inter-American Convention on Support Obligations; and (c) Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods by Road. See Parra-Aranguren, G., ‘The Fourth Inter-American Specialized Conference on Private International Law (CIDIP-IV,Montevideo,9–15 July 1989)’, 36 NILR (1989) pp. 268–284;Google ScholarParra-Aranguren, G., ‘La Cuarta Conferencia Especializada Interamericana sobre Derecho Intemacional Privado (CIDIP-IV, Montevideo, 9–15 de July, 1989)’, 75 Revista de la Facultad de Ciencias Juridicas y Polfticas de la Universidad Central de Venezuela (1990) pp. 99–186.Google Scholar

7. Makarov, A.N., Quellen des Internationalen Privatrechts. Nationale Kodifikationen (1978) pp. 309–313.Google Scholar

8. Nova, R. De, ‘Current Developments of Private International Law’, 13 AJCL (1964) p. 542;Google ScholarGoldschmidt, W., ‘El Proyecto Venezolano de Derecho Intemacional Privado’, 50 Revista del Ministerio de Justicia (1965) pp. 77–78;Google ScholarGoldschmidt, W., ‘Avances de la Extraterritorialidad de la Ley en el Pensamiento Jurédco lberoamericano’, 17 Revista Espafiola de Derecho Intenacional (1964)pp. 335–343;Google ScholarNeuhaus, P.H., ‘Proyecto Venezolano de Ley de Normas de Derecho Intenacional Privado. Observaciones de Derecho Comparado’, translation into Spanish by de Maekelt, T.B. in Libro-Homenaje a la Memoria de Lorenzo Herrera-Mendoza, Vol. I (1970) pp. 55–80;Google ScholarNeuhaus, P.H., ‘La actualidad de la codificatión del Derecho Intenacional Privado’, translation into Spanish by de Maekelt, T.B. in Libro-Homenaje a la Memoria de Joaquín Sánchez-Covisa (1975) pp. 245–251;Google ScholarSchwind, F. von, ‘Disposiciones generates del Proyecto Venezolano y recientes tendencias del Derecho Intemacional Privado’, translation into Spanish by Leu, H. in Libro-Homenaje a la Memoria de Roberto Goldschmidt (1967) pp. 691–702;Google ScholarValladao, H., ‘Direito Intemacional Privado, 2nd edn. (1970) p. 162.Google Scholar

9. Makarov, , op. cit. n. 7, pp. 55–65.Google Scholar

10. Makarov, op. cit. n. 7, pp. 40–51.

11. de Debakey, D. Revaredo, Código Civil. VI. Exposición y Comemarios (1985) pp. 870–875.Google Scholar

12. Pérez-Nieto, L., ‘El marco convencional intemnacional del Derecho Intemacional Privado mexicano’, 11 Relaciones Internationales (1980) pp. 35–36.Google Scholar

13. Groffier, E., ’Le projet de codification du droit international privé québécois’, 104 Journal de Droit International (1977) pp. 827–842.Google Scholar

14. The Draft was sanctioned by the Legislature on December 22,1991.

15. Symeonides, S., ‘Revising Puerto Rico's Conflicts Law: A Preview’, 28 Columbia J. Trans. L. (1960) pp. 412–417.Google Scholar

16. The Draft was sanctioned by Congress and signed by the Governor on July 24,1991 (Act No. 923), and it entered into force on January 1,1992.

17. Velazco, L. García, ‘El sistema de Derecho Intemacional Privado de la República de Cuba’, Revista Espíola de Derecho International (1989) p. 670.Google Scholar

18. Debakey, Revoredo de, op. cit. n. 11, pp. 878–880.Google Scholar

19. Samtleben, J., ‘Zur Entwickelung des Internationalen Privatrechts in Guatemala’, 51 RabelsZ (1987) pp. 119–120;Google ScholarTiedemann, A., ‘Neue Kollisionsnormen in El Salvador’, 51 RabelsZ (1987) pp. 120–123.Google Scholar

20. It is interesting to remark, as Pierre Meyer points out, that Art. 9 of the Inter-American Convention on General Rules has been reproduced by Art. 1009 of the Code des personnes et de la famille enacted in Burkina Faso, ZATU An VII on November 16,1989 (80 Rev. crit. (1990) p. 233).Google Scholar

21. Quebec's 1988 Draft included a similar provision (Art. 3439), but it was deleted in the 1990 revision.

22. Art. 10, para. 2, of the 1981 Draft literally reproduced the provision of the Venezuelan Draft (Proyecto del Nuevo Código Civil Peruano, Edición No Oficial, Lima, 1981, p. 4), but it was modified by the Revisory Commission of 1984.Google Scholar

23. Vázquez-Pando, F.A. remarks that even though Art. 12 of the Civil Code sanctions the principle of territoriality, it is expressed in a more flexible manner than in former times (‘Comentarios sobre el Nuevo Derecho Intemacional Privado Mexicano’, Undécimo Seminario National de DIP (1989)p.27).Google Scholar

24. Art. 2055, para. 2, of the 1984 Peruvian Draft provided for the same but it was deleted in the final version.

25. In the same sense see Art. IS of Guatemala's Law of Judicial Bodies {Ley del Organismo Judicial 1985).

26. Samtleben, J., ‘Neues Internationales Privatrecht in Peru’, 49 RabelsZ (1985) p. 497.Google Scholar

27. Perez-Nieto, L., Derecho Internacional Privado, 5th. edn. (1991) pp. 259–260,313.Google Scholar

28. The 1988 Draft admitted an exception in favour of the lex causae to characterize property as movable or immovable.

29. de Debakey, Revoredo, op. cit. n. 11, pp. 883–884.Google Scholar

30. Pérez-Nieto, L., ‘Réformes législatives en matière de Droit international privè au Méxique’, 78 Rev. crit. (1989) p. 597;Google ScholarPérez-Nieto, , op. cit n. 27, pp. 268,303.Google Scholar

31. de Debakey, Revoredo, op. cit. n. 11, pp. 885–886.Google Scholar

32. Parra-Aranguren, G., ‘General Course of Private International Law: Selected Problems’, 210 Hague Recueil (1988-III) no. 160, p. 133:Google ScholarParra-Aranguren, G., Curso General de Derecho Internacional Privado (Problemas Selectos) (1991) no. 160, pp. 175–176.Google Scholar

33. Overbeck, A.von, ‘Allgemeiner Teil des Internationalen Privatrechts’, in Lausanner Kolloquium über den deutschen und den schweizerischen Gesetzenwurf zur Neuregelung des Internationalen Privatrechts (1984) p. 42.Google Scholar