We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics. If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In the EU competition law context, the Advocate General's opinion in Akzo Nobel Chemicals Ltd v Commission of the European Communities (Akzo) was published on 29 April 2010
In Accentuate v Asigra 2009 EWHC 2655 (QB) the English High Court held it had jurisdiction to hear a claim for compensation under the Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993, even though the relevant agreement was subject to a choice of Canadian law and arbitration and the Canadian arbitral tribunal had already ruled against the claim
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has refused permission for various bodies, including the Law Society of England & Wales, the American Bar Association and the Association of General Counsel and Company Secretaries of the FTSE 100 (the GC100), to intervene in the appeal to the ECJ in the long-running Akzo Nobel case
In 2006 the UK notified the European Commission that it intended to opt out of the Rome I Regulation (5932008EC) on the law applicable to contractual obligations
