The new EU Succession Regulation in a nutshell
Multinational families or individuals with assets in different states, for example a bank account or a holiday home abroad, have been faced with conflicting (private international) laws which have led to difficulties, delays and uncertainties both during the planning stage of a succession and following a death. Facing this situation, the new EU Succession Regulation (EU) No 650/20121 which is applicable since 17 August 2015 aims to ameliorate and simplify international inheritance rules. However, due to various uncertainties it consequently provides for new challenges in crossborder estate planning.2
SOME REMARKS ON PREVENTION AND RESOLUTION OF POSITIVE JURISDICTION CONFLICTS BETWEEN CROATIAN (MEMBER STATE) AND SERBIAN COURTS IN CROSSBORDER SUCCESSION CASES – FROM CROATIAN (EU) AND SERBIAN POINT OF VIEW
The aim of this paper is to examine the possibilities for prevention and resolution of positive conflicts of jurisdiction between the Croatian (EU Member State) and Serbian (third State) courts in succession cases in which the assets of estate are located in both Croatia and Serbia. All issues will be discussed from the perspective of both Croatian (EU) and Serbian private international law. As regards Croatian (EU) private international law, the study begins with the presentation of the relevant jurisdiction rules of EU Succession Regulation (ESR) which provide for the Croatian (Member State) courts to have jurisdiction to rule on the succession as a whole in most cases, irrespective of where the assets of estate are located (the so called principle of unity of succession), and continues with the profound analysis of the rule of Art. 12(1) of ESR, which enables the Croatian (Member State) courts to prevent positive jurisdiction conflicts with Serbian courts by deciding not to rule on the assets located in Serbia. In addition, some remarks will be made on lis pendens rule of Art. 60 of Croatian PIL Act, which aims to prevent the pending of two parallel proceedings involving the same cause of action and between the same parties before the Croatian and Serbian or any other third State court (i.e. to resolve the positive conflicts of jurisdiction between Croatian and third State courts). When it comes to Serbian private international law, the study assesses the jurisdiction rules of the Serbian PIL Act (Art. 71–73), which follows the principle of scission of succession, in order to determine the relevant positive jurisdiction conflicts which need to be resolved by Serbian courts and analyzes the lis pendens rule of Art. 80 of Serbian PIL Act, which represents the main tool for
Letting Women in? Gender Mainstreaming in Regional Policies
Gender mainstreaming has over the last ten years become the dominant strategy of integrating gender issues in public policy. This article presents regional policy as a broad and increasingly important policy field to study, and analyses gender mainstreaming in this policy field in the Norwegian and the Swedish contexts. How do problem representations surrounding “gender equality” and “gender mainstreaming” produce meanings of gender as well as construct possibilities for change? The article shows that, despite some differences between the two countries, gender mainstreaming in regional policy can to a large extent be read as meaning “women”. Women are in this context given a narrow subject position and are constructed as lacking what it takes to produce sustainable regional growth. The concluding discussion highlights the relations between the implementation of gender mainstreaming and neo‐liberal political trends.