• ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
  • 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
  • 2 FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY
  • 2.1 CONTEXTUAL FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY. THE 1206/2001 REGULATION
  • 2.1.1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
  • 2.1.1.1 Binding all the Member States
  • 2.1.2 THE CREATION OF AN AREA OF FREEDOM, SECURITY AND JUSTICE IN THE EU
  • 2.2 THE CONTENT OF THE REGULATION
  • 2.2.1 ADOPTION OF REGULATION 1206/2001 (“the Regulation”)
  • 2.2.1.1 Relationship of Regulation 1206 with the European Judicial Network
  • 2.2.1.2 Transitional measures and relationship with other regulatory instruments
  • 2.2.2 SCOPE OF THE REGULATION
  • 2.2.2.1 Introduction
  • 2.2.2.2 Territorial scope
  • 2.2.3 BRIEF ANALYSIS OF THE METHODS FOR TAKING OF EVIDENCE IN THE REGULATION
  • 2.2.4 PURPOSE OF THE REGULATION. AN EX-ANTE EVALUATION
  • 2.3 OUR TASK IN CURRENT STUDY
  • 3 STUDY METHODOLOGY
  • 3.1 METHODOLOGY
  • 3.1.1 Objectives
  • 3.1.2 Approach taken
  • 3.1.2.1 Groups of Professionals
  • 3.1.3 The Results
  • 3.1.3.1 Targets for the Survey
  • 3.1.3.2 Information-gathering procedure
  • 3.2 THE TEAM FOR THE CURRENT STUDY
  • 4 STUDY FINDINGS
  • 4.1.1 Objectives of Regulation 1206/2001
  • 4.1.2 Speed of obtaining evidence
  • 4.1.3 Central bodies referred to in Article 3.1
  • 4.1.3.1 Effectiveness of the central bodies
  • 4.1.3.2 Participation of the central bodies
  • 4.1.4 Competent authorities referred to in Article 3(3)
  • 4.1.4.1 Conclusions
  • 4.1.4.2 Proposals
  • 4.1.5 The request: simplicity, clarity and legal certainty
  • 4.1.6 Communications technology
  • 4.1.6.1 Means of communication
  • 4.1.6.2 The impact of communications technology
  • 4.1.6.3 Use of the “swiftest possible means”
  • 4.1.7 The economic cost of assistance
  • 4.1.7.1 Conclusions
  • 4.1.7.2 Proposals
  • 4.1.8 Courts referred to in Article 2(2)
  • 4.1.8.1 Conclusions
  • 4.1.8.2 Proposals
  • 4.1.9 The direct transmission system
  • 4.1.9.1 The system of direct transmission between judges
  • 4.1.9.2 Receipt of the request
  • 4.1.9.3 Autonomous procedural law
  • 4.1.9.4