scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Symeon C. Symeonides

Bio: Symeon C. Symeonides is an academic researcher from Willamette University College of Law. The author has contributed to research in topics: Choice of law & Conflict of laws. The author has an hindex of 12, co-authored 105 publications receiving 622 citations. Previous affiliations of Symeon C. Symeonides include West Virginia University College of Law & Louisiana State University.


Papers
More filters
Posted Content
TL;DR: The European Union's new Regulation on Tort Conflicts (Rome II) as discussed by the authors unifies and federalizes the member states' laws on this subject and provides sufficient and flexible enough exceptions as to make the lex loci rule less arbitrary and the whole system more workable.
Abstract: This article reviews the European Union's new Regulation on tort conflicts ("Rome II"), which unifies and "federalizes" the member states' laws on this subject The review accepts the drafters' pragmatic premise that a rule-system built around the lex loci delicti as the basic rule, rather than American-style "approaches," was the only politically viable vehicle for unification Within this framework, the review examines whether Rome II provides sufficient and flexible enough exceptions as to make the lex loci rule less arbitrary and the whole system more workableThe author's answer is negative For example, the common-domicile exception is too broad in some respects and too narrow in other respects Likewise, the "manifestly closer connection" escape is phrased in exclusively geographical terms unrelated to any overarching principle and is worded in an all-or-nothing way that precludes issue-by-issue deployment and prevents it from being useful in all but the easiest of cases The review concludes that, although attaining a proper equilibrium between legal certainty and flexibility is always difficult, Rome II errs too much on the side of certainty, which ultimately may prove elusiveOn the whole, Rome II is a missed opportunity to take advantage of the rich codification experience and sophistication of modern European conflicts law Nevertheless, Rome II represents a major political accomplishment in unifying and equalizing the member states' laws on this difficult subject If this first step is followed by subsequent improvements, Europe would have achieved in a relatively short time much more than American conflicts law could ever hope for

32 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The European Union's new Regulation on Tort Conflicts (Rome II) as mentioned in this paper unifies and federalizes the member states' laws on this subject and provides sufficient and flexible enough exceptions as to make the lex loci rule less arbitrary and the whole system more workable.
Abstract: This article reviews the European Union's new Regulation on tort conflicts ("Rome II"), which unifies and "federalizes" the member states' laws on this subject. The review accepts the drafters' pragmatic premise that a rule-system built around the lex loci delicti as the basic rule, rather than American-style "approaches," was the only politically viable vehicle for unification. Within this framework, the review examines whether Rome II provides sufficient and flexible enough exceptions as to make the lex loci rule less arbitrary and the whole system more workable.The author's answer is negative. For example, the common-domicile exception is too broad in some respects and too narrow in other respects. Likewise, the "manifestly closer connection" escape is phrased in exclusively geographical terms unrelated to any overarching principle and is worded in an all-or-nothing way that precludes issue-by-issue deployment and prevents it from being useful in all but the easiest of cases. The review concludes that, although attaining a proper equilibrium between legal certainty and flexibility is always difficult, Rome II errs too much on the side of certainty, which ultimately may prove elusive.On the whole, Rome II is a missed opportunity to take advantage of the rich codification experience and sophistication of modern European conflicts law. Nevertheless, Rome II represents a major political accomplishment in unifying and equalizing the member states' laws on this difficult subject. If this first step is followed by subsequent improvements, Europe would have achieved in a relatively short time much more than American conflicts law could ever hope for.

25 citations

Book
30 Apr 2014
TL;DR: This chapter discusses the publicization of PrIL and the role of state interests, unilateralism, and international Uniformity in the development of this policy.
Abstract: Foreword Preface Summary of Contents Detailed Table of Contents Abbreviations List of Choice-of-Law Codifications List of EU Regulations List of Conventions List of Charts List of Figures List of Maps List of Tables Chapter 1. Introduction Chapter 2. Law Governing Tort Conflicts Chapter 3. Party Autonomy in Contract Conflicts Chapter 4. Codification and Flexibility Chapter 5. Broad or Narrow Choice of Law: Issue-by-Issue Choice and Depecage Chapter 6. Codification and Result Selectivism Chapter 7. The Publicization of PrIL: State Interests, Unilateralism, and International Uniformity Chapter 8. Conclusions Appendix. Codifications, Regulations, and Conventions: Alphabetical List and Bibliography Index

22 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a bibliography covering private international law or conflict of laws in a broad sense, covering judicial or adjudicatory jurisdiction, prescriptive jurisdiction, selection of forum, choice of law, federal-state conflicts, recognition and enforcement of sister-state and foreign-country judgments, extraterritoriality, arbitration and related topics.
Abstract: This bibliography covers private international law or conflict of laws in a broad sense. In particular, it covers judicial or adjudicatory jurisdiction, prescriptive jurisdiction, choice of forum, choice of law, federal-state conflicts, recognition and enforcement of sister-state and foreign-country judgments, extraterritoriality, arbitration and related topics. It includes books and law journal articles published in English during 2012. It does not include articles or essays published in books (as opposed to journals), or writings appearing only in electronic form.

22 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Sambanis et al. as discussed by the authors analyzed civil war not as a discrete phenomenon, but rather as one phase in a cycle of violence, and used 21 case studies of civil war onset and avoidance to show the shortcomings in prominent rationalist models of war that rely heavily on economic variables.
Abstract: This article draws on a comparative case study design to refine formal-quantitative models of civil war, expanding them to highlight political processes that lead to civil war. It uses 21 case studies of civil war onset and avoidance to show the shortcomings in prominent rationalist models of civil war that rely heavily on economic variables. These shortcomings include measurement error, unit heterogeneity, model misspecification, and lack of clarity about causal mechanisms. Additionally, the greed/grievance distinction that underlies the economic models is misguided. This article analyzes civil war not as a discrete phenomenon, but rather as one phase in a cycle of violence. Economic models of civil war, however, rely on theories that cannot distinguish effectively between civil war and other forms of political violence. To explain civil war, we must explain why various and often conflicting micro-level motives combine to produce political violence with the characteristics that we attribute to civil war. If we cannot understand why we get civil war instead of other forms of organized political violence, then we do not understand civil war.Nicholas Sambanis thanks Keith Darden, Anna Grzymala-Busse, Jennifer Hochschild, Stathis Kalyvas, Bruce Russett, Jack Snyder, Sidney Tarrow, Charles Tilly, and seminar participants at New York University and the University of Chicago for very useful comments, as well as Annalisa Zinn and Steve Shewfelt for excellent research assistance. He also gratefully acknowledges financial support from the World Bank's Post-Conflict Fund and from the Russell Sage Foundation, where he was fortunate to spend a year of academic leave working on this and related projects. This research is part of the Political Economy of Civil War, a collaborative project between Yale University's U.N. Studies Program and the World Bank's Conflict and Post-Conflict Reconstruction Unit.

318 citations

Book
19 Dec 2019
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors provide an unprecedented analysis and appraisal of party autonomy in private international law -the power of private parties to enter into agreements as to the forum in which their disputes will be resolved or the law which governs their legal relationships.
Abstract: This book provides an unprecedented analysis and appraisal of party autonomy in private international law - the power of private parties to enter into agreements as to the forum in which their disputes will be resolved or the law which governs their legal relationships. It includes a detailed exploration of the historical origins of party autonomy as well as its various theoretical justifications, and an in-depth comparative study of the rules governing party autonomy in the European Union, the United States, common law systems, and in international codifications. It examines both choice of forum and choice of law, including arbitration agreements and choice of non-state law, and both contractual and non-contractual legal relations. This analysis demonstrates that while an apparent consensus around the core principle of party autonomy has emerged, its coherence as a doctrine is open to question as there remains significant variation in practice across its various facets and between legal systems.

106 citations

Book
27 Feb 2012
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors map a hybrid world of legal conflicts and discuss the limits of sovereigntist territoriality and the legal negotiation of difference in a cosmopolitan pluralist approach to choice of law.
Abstract: Part I. Mapping a Hybrid World: 1. Introduction 2. A world of legal conflicts Part II. Retreating from Hybridity: 3. The limits of sovereigntist territoriality 4. From universalism to cosmopolitanism Part III. Embracing Hybridity: 5. Towards a cosmopolitan pluralist jurisprudence 6. Procedural mechanisms, institutional designs, and discursive practices for managing pluralism Part IV. Conflict of Laws in a Hybrid World: 7. The changing terrain of jurisdiction 8. A cosmopolitan pluralist approach to choice of law 9. Recognition of judgments and the legal negotiation of difference 10. Conclusion.

103 citations

Book
03 Jan 2013
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present an analysis of international law, science, and supra-legality in the context of climate change and international law for transnational finance, including the following: 1. Making non-legalities in international law 2. Illegality and the torture memos 3. Black holes and the outside within: extra-legal at Guantanamo 4. Doing deals: pre-and post-legal choice in transnational financing 5. Receiving climate change: law and science and supralegality 6.
Abstract: 1. Making non-legalities in international law 2. Illegality and the torture memos 3. Black holes and the outside within: extra-legality at Guantanamo 4. Doing deals: pre- and post-legal choice in transnational financing 5. Receiving climate change: law, science and supra-legality 6. Death, disaster and infra-legality in international law Conclusion.

85 citations