Sistema Regional de Información
en línea para Revistas Científicas de América Latina,
el Caribe, España y Portugal

The objective requirements for conformity are based on the characteristics and purposes that goods and digital content and services of the same type normally have and on the reasonable expectations of the consumer. The objective of this work is to study, on the one hand, the objective criteria of conformity in the TRLGDCU and in the Civil Code of Catalonia, and on the other hand, the consumer expectations, specifically in the light of the standard of reasonableness and the assessment elements that grant its delimitation.

The Court of Justice of the European Union clarifies that the concept of habitual residence of the Hague Protocol on the law applicable to maintenance obligations does not have to be affected by article 10 of Regulation (EC) 2201/2003, in the framework of an illegal transfer of minors by their mother from the United Kingdom to Poland, a State in which they request and obtain alimony in accordance with Polish law, applying Article 3 of the Protocol.

The Madrid Court of First Instance had to rule in a prototypical case reminiscent of the thalidomide catastrophe, which gave rise to a number of subsequent judgments in parallel and independent proceedings. The main question was if a patient suffers damage when treated with a toxic product sold by a German company and used in a medical operation in Spain, is Spanish law applicable to the patient’s claim for compensation against the German company’s insurer. In particular, the court had to decide if the claim could be exercised by means of direct action against the insurer, which is only provided in the Spanish legal system and not in the German one. The judgment of first instance merely applies the lex loci damni provided for in Article 4 (1) of Regulation (EC) No 863/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (hereinafter: Rome II), thus settling the question of the applicable law invoked by the defendant and thus achieving the application of Spanish law. It is particularly interesting to analyse this panorama, as it shows how current Spanish court ruling resolves intrinsic questions of private international law, such as the relationship of the Rome II Regulation with the Hague Convention of 2 October 1973, the application of Art. 5 Rome II in the case of damage caused by products used in medical interventions and the alternative connection of Art. 18 Rome II, when the regime to which the insurance contract is subject to excludes direct action; questions are ignored or resolved, in my opinion, erroneously or vaguely by the courts.

The Order of the Court of Justice of June 24, 2022 in K.S.-S.V.D. confirms the judgement of the Pancharevo case awarded six months before and obliges Member States to recognize the parentchild relationship established between a minor and her two mothers in a Member State for the sole purpose of issuing the documents necessary for them to exercise their right to free movement and residence.

This commentary analyses criteria for international jurisdiction in matters of divorce and divorce-related measures when Community nationals from different Member States reside with their children in third States where access to justice is not guaranteed. European Regulation rules do not provide adequate solutions when the marriage is composed of EU binationals and this is likely to infringe the right to effective judicial protection of EU nationals. This problem is linked to diplomatic status, whatever its scope, and as it affects those who enjoy it as well as those who sue a person covered by it.

When two different ways of resolving the question of how a change of habitual residence affects international jurisdiction in matters of child protection (perpetuation of jurisdiction in Brussels II or transfer of jurisdiction in the 1996 Hague Convention on the Protection of Children) come into contact, it is necessary to opt, and that is what the judgment of the CJ of 14 July 2022 does, anchoring its answer in reasons specific to the law of treaties, and consequently making the Convention solution prevail.

The purpose of this paper is the analysis of the judgment of the Court of Justice of March 8, 2022, case C-205/20. The question referred for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of article 20 of Directive 2014/67/EU of May 15, 2014.This question arose in the context of the dispute bet- ween NE and the Bezirksauptmannschaft Hartberg-Fürstenfeld in relation with the fine that it imposed on NE for various infringements of the Austrian provisions on labor law. This ruling analyzes the direct effect of European Directives, sanctions and the principle of proportionality and its criteria.