Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T14:14:15.910Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Venezuelan 1998 Act on Private International Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2009

Gonzalo Parra-Aranguren
Get access

Extract

In September 1958 the Venezuelan Ministry of Justice created a Commission, comprising Professors Roberto Goldschmidt, Gonzalo Parra-Aranguren and Joaquín Sánchez-Covisa, assigning it the task of preparing a Draft on Private International Law. A preliminary document was drawn up after ten months of intensive work, but the Commission decided to reflect on the Draft and it was only in April 1963 when it was completed, with an ‘Explanatory Report’ annexed.

Type
The Venezuelan 1998 Act on Private International Law
Information
Netherlands International Law Review , Volume 46 , Issue 3 , December 1999 , pp. 383 - 394
Copyright
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1999

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

2. 28 Boletín de la Academia de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales (1964) p. 80.

3. Freienfels, W. Müller, ‘Las modernas tendencias del Derecho de Familia’, Spanish translation by Professor T.B. de Maekelt, 29 Revista de la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad Central de Venezuela (1964) pp. 9–37.Google Scholar

4. Goldschmidt, W., ‘Avances de la Extraterritorialidad de la Ley en el Pensamiento Jurídico Iberoamericano’, 17 Revista Española de Derecho International (1964) pp. 335–343; idem, ’ElProyecto Venezolano de Derecho Internacional Privado’, 60 Revista del Ministerio de Justicia(1965) pp. 57–88.Google Scholar

5. Nova, R. De, ‘Current Developments of Private International Law’, 13 AJIL (1964) p. 542.Google Scholar

6. H. Valladao, Direito International Privado, 2nd edn. (Rio de Janeiro, Livraria Freitas Bastos 1970) p. 162.

7. F. von Schwind, ‘Disposiciones Generales del Proyecto Venezolano y Recientes Tendencias del Derecho Intermacional Privado’, Spanish translation by Professor H. Leu, in Libro-Homenaje a la Memoria de Roberto Goldschmidt (Caracas, Universidad Central de Venezuela, Facultad de Derecho 1967) pp. 691–702.

8. P.H. Neuhaus, ‘Proyecto Venezolano de Ley de Normas de Derecho Internacional Privado. Observaciones de Derecho Comparado’, Spanish translation by Professor T.B. de Maekelt, in Libro Homenaje a la Memoria de Lorenzo Herrera Mendoza, Vol. 1 (Caracas, Universidad Central de Venezuela, Facultad de Derecho 1970) pp. 55–80.

9. A.N. Makarov, Quellen des Internationalen Privatrechts. Nationale Kodifikationen, 3rd edn. (Tübingen, Mohr 1978) pp. 309–313.

10. P.H. Neuhaus, ‘La actualidad de la Codificación del Derecho Internacional Privado’, Spanish translation by Professor T.B. de Maekelt, in Libro-Homenaje a la Memoria de Joaquín Sánchez-Covisa (Caracas, Imprenta Universitaria 1975) pp. 245–251.

11. D. Revoredo de Debakey, ‘Propuesta Sustitutoria del Proyecto de Título Preliminar del Código Civil’, in Proyectos y Ante-Proyectos de la Reforma del Código Civil, Vol. I (Lima, Tipografia y Set-off Permanente S.A. 1980) p. 113; ‘Exposición de Motivos y Comentarios. Derecho Internacional Privado’, Código Civil peruano. Exposición de Motivos y Comentarios, Vol. VI (Lima, Okura, Editores S.A. 1985) pp. 874–875.

12. Dahl, E., ‘Argentina: Draft Code of Private International Law. Introductory Note and Translation’, 29 ILM (1985) p. 271.Google Scholar

13. L. Pérez-Nieto Castro, ‘Ante-Proyecto de Reformas al Código Civil para el Distrito Federal, en materia de Derecho Internacional Privado’, in Undécimo Seminario de Derecho Internacional Privado (México, Directión General de Publicaciones 1989) pp. 19–25.

14. The Code of Civil Procedure was adopted in 1986 and came into force on 16 March 1987.

15. The Italian Senate faced similar problem when discussing Bill 218/95 on the Riforma del sistema italiano di diritto internazionale privato. Therefore, rules on arbitration were excluded and sanctioned as Act No. 25, 5 January 1994, under the title: Nuove disposizioni in materia di arbitrato e discipline dell'arbitrato internazionale (A. Giardina, ‘Les caractères généraux de la réforme’, 85 Revue critique de droit international privé (1996) p. 5). The Venezuelan Act on Commercial Arbitration was enacted separately and came into force on 7 April 1998 (Gaceta Oficial de la República de Venezuela, No. 36.430, 7 April 1998). It has been loaded by the Venezuelan Supreme of Court of Justice in its web-site: http://www.csj.gov.ve/legislacion/lac.html.

16. Their comments were published after the adoption of the 1998 Act by Congress, under the title: Proyecto de Ley de Derecho Internacional Privado (1996). Comentarios (Caracas, 1998). The 1996 Draft and the amended ‘Explanatory Report’ are reproduced as annexes.

17. The only substantial modification made by the Senate was the addition of Art. 47. Special rules on formal validity of marriages, adoptions and wills were considered unnecessary because Art. 37 determined the law applicable to the form of legal acts in general; the introductory titles to the articles were also deleted to avoid confusions. Some amendments of style were suggested to Art. 1, Art. 37, para. 2, and to Art. 56, para. 5.

18. 110 Revista de la Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas de la Universidad Central de Venezuela (1998) pp. 167–201; see also http://www.zur2.com/fipa/Objetivos/legislacion_y_decisio-nes_tribuna.tml.

19. Gaceta Oficial de la República de Venezuela, No. 36.511,6 August 1998. The Act can be found on the Supreme Court's web-site: http://www.csj.gov.ve/legislacion/Idip.html.

20. The procedural treatment of foreign law is dealt in Arts. 60 and 61.

21. The Inter-American Convention on General Rules of Private International Law (CIDIP-II, Montevideo, 1979) does not regulate the problem of renvoi (18 ILM (1979) pp. 1236–1238). The Spanish text of the Inter-American Conventions is to be found in the web-site of the Organization of the American States: http://www.oas.org/EN/PROG/JURIDICO/english/treaties.html.

22. The language of Art. 5 of the Inter-American Convention on General Rules of Private International Law (CIDIP-II, Montevideo, 1979) is slightly different. It prescribes: ‘The law declared applicable by a convention on private international law may be refused application in the territory of a State Party that considers it manifestly contrary to the principles of its public policy (ordre public)’ (18 ILM (1979) p.1237).

23. According to its Art. 7, ‘Juridical relationships validly established in a State Party in accordance with all the laws which have a connection at the time of their establishment shall be recognized in the other States Parties, provided that they are not contrary to the principles of their public policy (ordre public)’(18ILM (1919) p. 1237).

24. Its Art. 11 prescribes: ‘Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding articles, the provisions of the law of the forum shall be necessarily applied when they are mandatory requirements. It shall be up to the forum to decide when it applies the mandatory provisions of the law of another State with which the contract has close ties’ (33 ILM (1994) p. 735).

25. Proyecto de Ley de Derecho Internacional Privado y Exposición de Motivos(Caracas, República de Venezuela, Ministerio de Justicia 1963) p. 7.

26. Ibid.

27. P. Lagarde, ‘Convention du 19 octobre 1996 concernant la compétence, la loi applicable, la reconnaissance, l'exécution et la coopération en matière de responsabilité parentale et de measures de protection des enfants. Rapport explicatif’, in Permanent Bureau of the Conference, Actes et documents de la Dix-huitième session, Vol. II (Protection des enfants) (The Hague, SDU 1998) No. 40, p. 553. However, it was ‘accepted that the temporary absence of the child from the place of his or her habitual residence for reasons of vacation, of school attendance or of the exercise of access rights, for example, did not modify the principle of the child's habitual residence.’ P. Lagarde, ‘Rapport Explicatif. Protection des adultes. Avant-projet de Convention concernant la compétence, la loi applicable, la recconaissance, I'exéction et la coopération en matière de mesures de protection des adultes’, adopted by the Special Commission, Preliminary Document No. 2 for the attention of the Special Commission of a Diplomatic Character of September/October 1999 on the Protection of Adults, 1998, No. 43, p. 65. The Special Commission approved the Convention on 2 October 1999.

28. Proyecto de Ley de Derecho Internacional Privado y Exposición de Motivos, supra n. 25, at pp. 7–8.

29. 18 ILM (1979) pp. 1235. The Convention was ratified by the Venezuelan Congress in 1985, with express reservation of Art. 3, but the government has neither ordered its publication in the Official Gazette nor deposited its instrument of ratification: it is therefore not in force in Venezuela.

30. Art. 3 of the Inter-American Convention on Domicile of Natural Persons in Private International Law (CIDIP-II, Montevideo, 1979) sanctions the traditional solution. It prescribes: ‘The domicile of incapacitated persons is that of their legal representatives, except when they are abandoned by those representatives, in which case their former domicile shall continue’ (18 ILM (1979) p. 1234). This Article was reserved by the Venezuelan Congress when adopted the Convention (see supra n. 29).

31. 18 ILM (1979) p. 1222.

32. 24 ILM (1985)p.465.

33. A. Borrás, ‘Rapport explicatif relatif à la Convention établie sur la base de 1’article K.3 du traité de I’Union européenne concernant la compétence, la reconaissance et I’exécution des decisions en matière matrimoniale’, OJ C 221, 16 July 1998, No. 32, p. 38.

34. Cf., supra n. 15. Art. 62 expressly prescribes that, except as provided by Art. 47, all matters relating to international commercial arbitration shall be regulated by their special rules.

35. 18 ILM (1979)p. 1225.

36. Venezuela has ratified the following multilateral treaties on judicial assistance strictu sensu: (a) Inter-American Convention on Letters Rogatory (CIDIP-I, Panama, 1975) and its Additional Protocol (CIDIP-II, Montevideo, 1979); (b) Inter-American Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad (CIDIP-I, Panama, 1975) and its Additional Protocol (CIDIP-III, La Paz, 1984); (c) Hague Convention of 15 November 1965 on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters; (d) Hague Convention of 18 March 1970 on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters. Venezuela is also contracting state of the Hague Convention of 5 October 1961 Abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public Documents. On the last three Conventions see: http://www.hcch.net.

37. The same regulation was adopted by Arts. 2 and 4 of the Inter-American Convention on General Rules of Private International Law (CIDIP-II, Montevideo, 1979), ratified by Venezuela; Venezuela is also contracting state of the Inter-American Convention on Proof of and Information on Foreign Law (CIDIP-II, Montevideo, 1979) (18 ILM (1979) pp. 1231–1234).