• EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
  • INTRODUCTION
  • PART I
  • COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE NATIONAL REPORTS
  • (A) GENERAL STRUCTURE OF NATIONAL JURISDICTIONAL RULES FOR CROSSBORDERDISPUTES
  • (B) BILATERAL AND MULTILATERAL CONVENTIONS
  • (C) APPLICABLE NATIONAL RULES PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 4 OF THE BRUSSELS I REGULATION
  • (D) NATIONAL JURISDICTION & ENFORCEMENT OF NON-EU JUDGMENTS
  • (E) DECLINING JURISDICTION
  • (F) THE ADEQUATE PROTECTION (OR LACK THEREOF) OF EU NATIONALS AND/OR DOMICILIARIES THROUGH THE APPLICATION OF NATIONAL JURISDICTIONAL RULES
  • (G) RESIDUAL JURISDICTION UNDER THE NEW BRUSSELS II REGULATION
  • PART II
  • RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED FURTHER
  • HARMONISATION OF JURISDICTION
  • (A) THE INITIAL OBJECTIVE OF REGULATING JURISDICTION IN “COMMUNITYDISPUTES”
  • (B) THE MAIN OPTIONS FOR THE PROPOSED HARMONIZATION
  • (C) PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE SUPPRESSION OF THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN EU AND NON-EU DEFENDANTS
  • (D) FURTHER HARMONIZATION OF JURISDICTION UNDER BRUSSELS II
  • CONCLUSIONS