Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-xtvcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-14T09:15:56.789Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Competex, S.A. v. Labow

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

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
Judicial Decisions
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 80 , Issue 4 , October 1986 , pp. 958 - 961
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1986

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

1 304 U.S. 64 (1938).

2 Restatement of Foreign Relations Law of the United States (Revised) §823(1) comment c (Tent. Draft No. 6, 1985).

3 See Miliangos v. George Frank (Textiles) Ltd., [1975] 3 All E.R. 801 (H.L.).

4 Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws §144 comment g (1969); see Deutsche Bank Filiale Nurnberg v. Humphrey, 272 U.S. 517 (1926).

5 783 F.2d 333, 339.

6 Restatement (Second) of Judgments §18 comment j (1982).

7 248 N.Y. 1, 161 N.E. 201 (1928).

8 See Shaw, Savill, Albion & Co. v. The Fredericksburg, 189 F.2d 952 (2d Cir. 1951) (in which Judge Frank saw difficulties of Einsteinian dimension); Vishipco Line v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A., 660 F.2d 854 (2d Cir. 1981) (applying the New York rule), cert, denied, 459 U.S. 976 (1982).