Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-m9pkr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T00:12:20.373Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

International Litigation and Arbitration: Practice and Planning. By Russell J. Weintraub. Durham: Carolina Academic Press, 1994. Pp. 503. Index. $65. - International Litigation and Arbitration. By Andreas F. Lowenfeld. St. Paul: West Publishing Co., 1993. Pp. xxvii, 862. Index. $50. - International Civil Litigation in United States Courts: Commentary and Materials (2d ed.). By Gary B. Born and David Westin. Deventer: Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers, 1992. Pp. 905. Index. $92, cloth; $60, paper.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Linda J. Silberman
Linda J. Silberman*
Affiliation:
New York University School of Law
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Book Reviews and Notes
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 89 , Issue 3 , July 1995 , pp. 679 - 686
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1995

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 Stephen H. Burbank, Practice and Procedure: The World in Our Courts, 89 Mich. L. Rev. 1456, 1459 (1991).

2 Born and Westin do give a brief sketch of the European approach to enforcement of judgments under the Brussels Convention (pp. 786–88); they also note foreign reaction, in the form of parliamentary debate and blocking statutes, to the extraterritorial application of U.S. law (pp. 600–03).

4 Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno, 454 U.S. 235 (1981).

4 See Linda J. Silberman, Developments in Jurisdiction and Forum Non Conveniens in International Litigation: Thoughts on Reform and a Proposal for a Uniform Standard, 28 Tex. Int’l L.J. 501, 516–28 (1993).

5 757 F.2d 1215 (11th Cir.), cert, denied, 474 U.S. 948 (1985).

6 486 U.S. 140 (1988).

7 The Supreme Court held that the issue of the propriety of Texas state court for litigation of plaintiff’s claims had not been adjudicated in the previous action, and the question of whether federal law had preempted state law in this situation was for the state courts in the first instance. On remand, the Texas Supreme Court held that federal maritime law preempted state law, although the U.S. Supreme Court’s later decision in American Dredging Co. v. Miller, 114 S.Ct. 981 (1994), ruled that a state court was free to apply its own doctrine of forum non conveniens to claims brought in state court under the Jones Act and general maritime law.

8 114 S.Ct. 981 (1994).

9 Justice Scalia wrote: “[F]orum non conveniens… is in two respects quite dissimilar from any other matter that our opinions have held to be governed by federal admiralty law; it is procedural rather than substantive, and it is most unlikely to produce uniform results.” Id. at 987.

10 Smith Kline & French Laboratories Ltd. v. Bloch, [1983] 2 All E.R. 72 (C.A.).

11 [1984] 3 W.L.R. 413.

12 159 U.S. 313 (1995).

13 453 F.2d 435 (3d Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 405 U.S. 1017 (1972).

14 See Linda Silberman, Judicial Jurisdiction in the Conflict of Laws Course; Adding a Comparative Dimension, 28 Vand. J. Transnat’l L. (forthcoming 1995).

15 113 S.Ct. 2891 (1993). For the view that the Supreme Court’s approach in Hartford should be limited to antitrust cases, see Larry Kramer, Extraterritorial Application of American Law After the Insurance Antitrust Case: A Reply to Professors Lowenfeld and Trimble, 89 AJIL (forthcoming 1995).

16 630 F.2d 876 (2d Cir. 1980).

17 See Harold Hongju Koh, Transnational Public Law Litigation, 100 Yale L.J. 2347 (1991).

18 See, e.g., Republic of Philippines v. Marcos, 862 F.2d 1335 (9th Cir. 1988) (en banc), cert. denied, 490 U.S. 1035 (1989).

19 466 U.S. 408(1984).

20 480 U.S. 102 (1987).

21 See generally Andreas F. Lowenfeld, International Litigation and the Quest for Reasonableness (Hague Academy General Course on Private International Law), 245 Recueil des Cours 81–122 (1994 I).

22 Parsons & Whittemore Overseas Co. v. Societe Generate de l’Industrie du Papier (RAKTA), 500 F.2d [??]

23 See Gary B. Born, International Commercial Arbitration in the United States: Commentary & Materials (1994).

24 Somportex, Ltd. v. Philadelphia Chewing Gum Corp., [1968] 3 All E.R. 26 (C.A.).

25 453 F.2d 435 (3d Cir. 1971), cert, denied, 405 U.S. [??]

26 Henry v. Geoprosco Int’l Ltd., [1976] Q.B. 726 (C.A.), and the subsequent legislative change in section 33 of the Jurisdiction and Judgments Act of 1982.

27 A note at the end of the chapter (p. 786, n.8) does discuss the European approach to enforcement and the Brussels Convention.

28 See, e.g., In re Euronapa, 1995 U.S. App. Lexis 5606 (2d Cir. 1995); In re Aldunate, 3 F.3d 54 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 114 S. Ct. 443 (1993); In re Malev Hungarian Airlines, 964 F.2d 97 (2d Cir. 1993); In re Asta Medica, S.A., 981 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1992).

29 Société Nationale Industrielle Aérospatiale v. U.S. District Court, 482 U.S. 322 (1987).