Archive for category: Obituaries

The author of this post is Massimo Benedettelli, formerly a Professor of International law at the University of Bari “Aldo Moro”.

---

One of the leading jurists of the twentieth century has passed away. If the Italian academic tradition requires all international law professors to be versed in conflicts and the law of nations at once, Paolo Picone can be considered one of the few scholars in the world who were true masters in both disciplines, having developed groundbreaking and original analytical perspectives on all the topics he elected to study during his almost fifty-year career.

Indeed, his works on erga omnes obligations demonstrated how the international community may protect fundamental values and collective interests of humanity by laying down obligations that States do not owe vis-à-vis each other but rather towards the international community as a whole, every State being entitled to act uti universi for their enforcement as if it were a de facto organ.

His holistic analysis of the network of post-WWII treaties, multilateral organisations, and other instruments which, from Bretton Woods onwards, regulate the global flow of goods, services, and capital enabled him to posit that the international community is endowed with its own “economic constitution” governing inter-State economic relations on the basis of a uniform set of basic principles.

Turning to private international law, he was the first to highlight that contemporary legal systems coordinate with each other in the regulation of cross-border private matters using a plurality of methods that are radically different in terms of their function, structure, and theoretical foundation.

Born in Naples in 1940, Paolo Picone graduated in law in 1963 from the local University “Federico II” with the highest marks. From 1963 to 1969 he served as assistant to the chair of Rolando Quadri, one of the “founding fathers” of the Italian school of international law, being the junior member of a team which included jurists of the caliber of Benedetto Conforti (later a judge at the European Court of Human Rights), Luigi Ferrari-Bravo (later a judge at the International Court of Justice), and Antonio Tizzano (later a judge at the European Court of Justice).

Notwithstanding having scored first in the bar exam in 1966 and being awarded the Toga d’oro prize, he decided not to practice law (something for which he showed no interest throughout his entire life) but to pursue an academic career, where he quickly advanced.

Having obtained the habilitation in 1969, he was appointed full professor (professore ordinario) in 1975, holding the chair of International Law first at the Faculty of Law of the University of Bari “Aldo Moro” (1976–1980), then at the Faculty of Economics of the University of Naples “Federico II” (1981–1998), and finally at the Faculty of Law of the University of Rome “La Sapienza” (1999), where he became Director of the Institute of International Law and, upon retirement, was awarded the title of emeritus.

A visiting professor at the Free University of Berlin-West (1971), the Faculty of Law of the University of Paris I – Sorbonne (1983), and the Faculty of Law of the University of Hamburg (1987), he carried out long periods of research and study stays in other institutions, such as the Free University of Berlin-West, the NYU Law School, and the Max Planck Institutes in Heidelberg and Hamburg.

He participated in, and for some years led, the Italian delegation to the Hague Conference on Private International Law, where he actively cooperated with the works of the sessions held in 1984, 1988, 1993, and 1996.

In recognition of his worldwide reputation, he was made a member in 2001 of the Institut de droit international and in 2006 of the Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, one of the oldest and most reputable Italian scientific institutions.

His first monograph (1969), a 667-page book on the complex issue of special conflict-of-laws rules regulating the prerequisites for the application of substantive norms, was praised for its innovative analysis by scholars of the standing of Leo Raape and Fritz Sturm and earned him an invitation from Wilhelm Wengler to serve as his research associate at the Free University of West Berlin. This led to co-editing with Wengler the anthology Internationales Privatrecht, published in 1974 in the prestigious Wege der Forschung series.

His subsequent books on a divorced foreigner’s capacity to marry (1970), the relationship between private international law rules and substantive rules of the forum (1971), and the formal structure of the problem of preliminary questions (1971) were reviewed in Rabels Zeitschrift and other journals, strengthening his international reputation.

While continuing his public international law studies (in 1973 he published a book on the provisional application of treaties, elaborating the original category of international agreements which are “juridical but not binding”), the first phase of Paolo Picone’s career saw him mostly focused on private international law.

On the correct premise that “laws” should not be conflated with “legal systems”, and that private international law does not only deal with conflict-of-laws issues since questions of international jurisdiction and recognition of foreign judgments are also essential for its coordination purposes, he identified a peculiar private international law technique, which he named the “method of the reference to the competent (foreign) legal system”. This became the subject-matter of the course he was invited to give at The Hague Academy of International Law in 1984, which was then published in the Recueil two years later.

This original and innovative perspective led him to identify two other private international law methods – one based on alternative conflict rules inspired by “material” considerations and one contemplating the generalized application of the lex fori (or “jurisdictional approach”) – which he proved to exist in positive law, alongside the “traditional” Savignyian method of the localisation of factual situations and the newly discovered method of the reference to the competent legal system.

In numerous writings, the characteristics of these four different methods, the different answers they give to classic issues of “general theory”, and their interplay, also as a result of party autonomy, were first tested in light of the 1995 reform of Italian private international law, then examined from a comparative law perspective, and finally presented in the General Course of Private International Law which Paolo Picone delivered at The Hague Academy in 1999. Today, Les méthodes de coordination entre ordres juridiques en droit international privé (Recueil des Cours, 1999) remains a fundamental reading for anyone who wants to approach the study (and practice) of private international law in a rigorous, non-amateurish way.

In 2004, he edited a book on the EU harmonisation of the Member States’ private international law – a phenomenon which, to put it gently, he did not support with enthusiasm due to the lack of a systematic approach and theoretical grounding which he believed characterized the action of the EU legislator – where he noted that the four different private international law methods he had devised were also operating at the EU level (probably unbeknownst to the Brussels institutions).

This was Paolo Picone’s last contribution to private international law scholarship. Thereafter, he mostly focused on public international law, studying through the lens of obligations erga omnes matters as different as environmental law, aggression and other international crimes, authorisations to the use of force by the UN Security Council, State responsibility, jus cogens norms, and international criminal courts.

This résumé of Paolo Picone’s contribution to the science of (public and private) international law would be incomplete without mention of the book reviews he routinely published throughout his life in the Rivista di diritto internazionale and other legal journals. Young scholars in search of inspiration for new areas of research are strongly advised to consider them. In fact, in both dimensions and content, they are not really book reviews in the traditional sense but rather “mini-articles” which Paolo Picone used as an occasion to start indirect debates with the reviewed author (a famous one was entertained with Pierre Mayer) and to synthesize ideas and suggestions for future studies on a wide range of topics.

Throughout a career that spanned more than forty years, Paolo Picone trained countless students and was a generous mentor to many generations of scholars, even those not belonging to his “school”, whom he helped enter academia and develop their careers.

A true Neapolitan in love with his hometown, he combined subtle irony with a strong character, often harsh and unconventional. Because of this character, he may not have received all the rewards that his genius and exceptional talent warranted. However, his name will remain in the history of international law.

At a time when sovereigntism construes international law only on bilateral “contractualist” terms (if not going so far as to challenge its very existence) and asserts the alleged supremacy of the law of the forum, Paolo Picone’s scholarship will continue to offer fundamental tools to those who wish to defend the idea of an international community governed by the rule of law and where legal values circulate among nations.

The author of this post is Martin Gebauer (Eberhard Karl University of Tübingen).

---

Erik Jayme passed away on 1 May 2024, just five weeks before his expected celebration of his ninetieth birthday.

He was born on 8 June 1934, in Montréal, in the francophone Canadian province of Québec. His parents were married on Christmas 1930 by a Protestant priest in Detroit, Michigan. His father was domiciled in Ontario and his mother was living in Wisconsin. His mother was Norwegian and his father was a German Huguenot of French origin. By getting married in a religious ceremony, his mother acquired German nationality and later remained a dual citizen. This status, as Erik Jayme mentioned sometimes, compelled him to engage in Private International Law.

After studying both art history and law in Frankfurt and Munich, Erik Jayme wrote his doctoral thesis mainly during the years 1958-1959 in Pavia. His first monograph on the challenges in the application of Italian law by German courts (“Spannungen bei der Anwendung italienischen Familienrechts durch deutsche Gerichte”) was published in 1961 and established a very special relationship with Italy for the rest of his life. Erik Jayme became increasingly fascinated by the Italian history of legal thought in Private International Law and Comparative Law. This interest predominantly focused on the nineteenth century and scholars like Emerico Amari, Giuseppe Pisanelli, and Pasquale Stanislao Mancini (and their respective relationships with Carl Josef Anton Mittermaier from Heidelberg), but also extended to earlier epochs like the sixteenth century and the statute law of cities like Ferrara within the legal pluralism of the time. He was convinced that history is always present in Private International Law like in no other area of law. Later, he developed another close relationship with the law of the Lusophone countries.

Individual persons and their cultural identity in cross-border legal relationships became a guiding theme in Erik Jayme’s research, certainly influenced by his understanding of nineteenth-century Italian scholars like Mancini. Private interests, not the sovereignty of a state or governmental interests, were regarded as the guiding principles of Private International Law. Taking seriously the diversity of persons and legal systems within their cultural contexts was a reason for him to introduce postmodern thoughts to Comparative Law and Private International Law, primarily in his Hague Lectures of 1995.

A completely different world opened to Erik Jayme when he arrived in the United States in 1965 and explored the ongoing “conflicts revolution” from the inside. His LL.M. thesis on “Interspousal Immunity – Revolution and Counterrevolution in American Conflicts Law” was published in the Southern California Law Review in 1967, a paper with 293 footnotes. What was originally intended as a short-term stay for the LL.M. program at Berkeley turned into a fruitful collaboration and close friendship with Albert Armin Ehrenzweig (1906-1974). Ehrenzweig passed away fifty years ago on 4 June 1974. The first volume of Ehrenzweig’s “Private International Law” was published in 1967 (General Part), the second volume (Jurisdiction, Judgments, Persons) was published as Ehrenzweig/Jayme in 1973, and the third volume (Obligations) after Ehrenzweig’s death in 1977. Unlike Mancini, Ehrenzweig was skeptical of any kind of “superlaw” and sought to derive conflicts rules from the substantive legal system of the lex fori and its policies (in an open continuity with Carl Georg von Wächter). However, substantive elements of foreign law could also be incorporated as “local data”.  Erik Jayme introduced similar approaches by considering the cross-border situation not only in the application of conflicts rules but also in the interpretation and adaptation of the applicable substantive laws.

After his habilitation in Mainz (1969), Erik Jayme became a professor first in Münster, then in Munich (1974), and finally in Heidelberg (1983) where he spent more than 40 years of his life. His ease of learning foreign languages and his diplomatic, cultivated, and open-minded demeanor combined with his strong humanity facilitated discourse and exchange on the international stage. His door at the Heidelberg Institute on Augustinergasse 9 was always open to foreign scholars and students. He received five honorary doctorates from universities on different continents and was a member of even more international academies. He served as President of the Institut de Droit International from 1997 to 1999 and as Vice-President of the Hague Academy of International Law from 2004 to 2016. However, he most enjoyed teaching and continued to offer courses to students until the last winter term, specifically in Art Law and International Family Law.

Erik Jayme was fascinated by contrasts, and he consistently crossed borders, not only between cultures, languages, and legal systems but also across interdisciplinary boundaries. From Ehrenzweig, he learned to view the law not only from its internal perspective but also from an external viewpoint. Since Erik Jayme had a strong passion for the arts, it was only logical that he would contribute to developing art law and become one of its leading experts. Another contrast was the relationship between theory and practice. Anyone who had the privilege of attending his lectures or courses was introduced to legal issues through concrete cases. This inductive approach was a feature not only of his teaching but also of his research and scholarship. He often began with the phrase, “The following considerations come from a practical case,” as seen in his first law review publication (StAZ Das Standesamt 1963, 130: “Die folgenden Erörterungen gehen von einem praktischen Fall aus”). The inductive method of approaching legal issues was likely one of the reasons why his contributions were often remarkably concise. Another reason was his extraordinary ability to express complex thoughts succinctly. An eight-page contribution in a Liber Amicorum or a “Festschrift” could lay the groundwork for at least a doctoral thesis.

Twenty years after his own doctoral thesis, he co-founded a new law review in 1981 with the same publishing house (Gieseking), which had a significant impact on future discussions in Private International Law both in Germany and abroad. The review, titled “Praxis des Internationalen Privat- und Verfahrensrechts” (“IPRax”), was a play on words, combining the abbreviation for Private International Law (PIL or IPR in German) with a focus on practical application over theory. Still in the 1980s, Erik Jayme, together with Christian Kohler, drafted the annual reports in IPRax on the current developments in European Private International Law. These annual reports now serve as historical documents reflecting the dynamic evolution of European PIL over the last four decades. The reports included titles such as “Europäisches Kollisionsrecht 1999 – Die Abendstunde der Staatsverträge” (“European Conflict of Laws 1999 – the Evening Hour of the Treaties,” IPRax 1999, 401).

Erik Jayme once wrote that amidst the whirl of small facts, one should always try to concentrate on the basic ideas that direct a certain field of law. He suggested that one way to do this is to look at history. Not only in his legal thought did he always combine the particular and the details with some basic idea and grassroots perspective, but the same approach applied to his passion for art and his unique and open-minded way of interacting with individuals. In a profoundly human manner, he understood the people around him, and years later, he would remember small details from their lives. We will always treasure his way of viewing the world with well-meaning humor, a special, fine irony that included himself, and a rich portion of human understanding.

This post was written by Sören Segger-Piening, Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg.

---

It is with a heavy heart that I have to announce the passing of Oliver Remien on 24 April 2023 after a short, severe illness at the age of only 66. He held the Chair of Civil Law, European Economic Law, Private International Law and Litigation as well as Comparative Law at the University of Würzburg from 2001 until his retirement on 1 April 2023. From 1982 to 2000 he had worked as an assistant and research fellow at the Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law in Hamburg under the supervision of his teacher Ulrich Drobnig. I consider myself lucky to have been Oliver Remien’s student, mentee and friend since 2007.

His work is as multi-layered as it is extensive, which is why the following can only be an incomplete coverage of some of his research priorities.

Early on he pointed out the various dimensions of European private law and benefited from his work as Secretary to the Commission on European Contract Law (Lando-Group) from 1982 to 1990. He repeatedly surveyed, illuminated and advanced the system of internal market law and its implications for private law: fundamentally in his habilitation thesis on Mandatory Law of Contract and the Fundamental Freedoms (2003), most recently in a note on the Thelen Technopark decision of the CJEU.

He made many fundamental contributions to private international law, for example on foreign trade law, overriding mandatory provisions, consumer contracts and the European Succession Regulation. Furthermore, he devoted himself to the “secret king” of conflict of laws: the application of foreign law by domestic courts.

The latter links to his work in the field of international and comparative civil procedure. His ground-breaking and widely acclaimed dissertation on Rechtsverwirklichung durch Zwangsgeld (1992) bears witness to this, as does his recent contribution in the grey area between arbitration and the international jurisdiction regime of the Brussels Ia Regulation.

Of course, he also provided a variety of important impulses in German law, for example with his contribution on the limitation of claims in rem.

During his time at the University of Würzburg, Oliver Remien organised a large number of conferences on important topics in his research areas such as: Modernisation of the Law of Obligations and European Contract Law (2006); The Law of Prescription in Europe (2009); Damages in European Private and Business Law (2010); European Unification of Conflict of Laws (2010, together with Eva-Maria Kieninger); Investment Protection, Arbitration and the Rule of Law in the EU (2017, together with Markus Ludwigs). He was also keen to cooperate with the Law Faculty in Bucharest, as evidenced by a volume on Common European Private Law in Romania (together with Liviu Zidaru), which currently is being printed.

Standing in awe before this comprehensive body of work – which I can only describe inadequately – is accompanied by at least as much admiration for Oliver Remien’s personality: his friendly and open character, his curiosity and his ever-recurring enthusiasm for novelties were outstanding. With Oliver Remien we do not only loose a great European researcher in the truest sense of the word, but also a dear person and friend. He is dearly missed.

My thoughts are with his family and loved ones.