IX MEETING OF PERMANENT - OAS



MEETING OF GOVERNMENT EXPERTS OEA/Ser.K/XXI

TO PREPARE FOR THE SIXTH INTER-AMERICAN REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.6/00 corr. 2

SPECIALIZED CONFERENCE ON PRIVATE 14 March 2000

INTERNATIONAL LAW (CIDIP-VI) Original: Spanish

February 14-18, 2000

Washington, D.C.

REPORT OF THE MEETING OF GOVERNMENT EXPERTS TO PREPARE

FOR THE SIXTH INTER-AMERICAN SPECIALIZED CONFERENCE ON

PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW (CIDIP-VI)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Explanatory Note v

Report of the Meeting of Government Experts to Prepare for the Sixth Inter-American Specialized Conference on Private International Law (CIDIP-VI) 1

I. Introduction 1

II. Proceedings 2

III. Conclusions and Recommendations 10

ANNEXES

A. Agenda 13

B. List of Participants 15

C. List of Documents 29

EXPLANATORY NOTE

This report has been approved by the Meeting of Government Experts to Prepare for the Sixth Inter-American Specialized Conference on Private International Law (CIDIP-VI), held from February 14 through 18, 2000, at the Organization's headquarters, pursuant to the provisions of resolutions AG/RES. 1613 (XXIX-O/99) and CP/RES. 744 (1185/99).

REPORT OF THE MEETING OF GOVERNMENT EXPERTS TO PREPARE

FOR THE SIXTH INTER-AMERICAN SPECIALIZED CONFERENCE ON

PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW (CIDIP-VI)

I. INTRODUCTION

1. Background

The General Assembly, at its twenty-sixth regular session, through resolution AG/RES. 1393 (XXVI-O/96), convened the Sixth Inter-American Conference on Private International Law (CIDIP-VI) and instructed the Permanent Council to approve the rules of procedure and agenda for the Sixth Inter-American Specialized Conference (CIDIP-VI), to be presented to the governments of the member states for approval. The General Assembly also requested the Secretary General to “carry out all necessary activities related to the preparatory phase of CIDIP-VI, including the coordination of the meetings of experts and the exchange of information and documents (...)

In 1997, the General Assembly, through resolution AG/RES. 1472 (XXVII-O/97), urged the member states that had not yet done so to provide their comments and observations on the draft agenda for CIDIP-VI. The draft agenda was adopted by the General Assembly at its twenty-eighth regular session, through resolution AG/RES. 1558 (XXVIII-O/98).

On October 21, 1998, the Permanent Council convened[1]/ the Meeting of Experts on CIDIP-VI, pursuant to operative paragraph 2 of resolution AG/RES. 1558 (XXVIII-O/98), which instructs the Permanent Council to define the precise scope of the topics proposed for CIDIP-VI. The results of that meeting, held in December 1998, were published as document RE/CIDIP-VI/ doc.9/98.

2. Convocation

The Permanent Council, through resolution CP/RES. 744 (1185/99), approved the final agenda for the Sixth Inter-American Specialized Conference on Private International Law (CIDIP-VI) and resolved to convene two meetings of government experts before the aforementioned Specialized Conference was held.

The General Assembly, at its twenty-ninth regular session, through resolution AG/RES. 1613 (XXIX-O/99), thanked the Permanent Council for approving the agenda for the Sixth Inter-American Specialized Conference on Private International Law (CIDIP-VI) and instructed it “to set the date and place, in collaboration with the General Secretariat, for the two meetings of government experts convened through resolution CP/RES. 744 (1185/99) to examine the documentation and prepare studies on the topics” identified in the first operative paragraph of AG/RES. 1613 (XXIX-O/99).

II. PROCEEDINGS

1. Opening session

The opening session took place at 10:00 a.m. on February 14, 2000. Ambassador Claude Heller, Permanent Representative of Mexico to the Organization, served as Acting Chair of the meeting in his capacity as Chair of the Committee on Juridical and Political Affairs. Ambassador Heller declared the meeting open and its work under way.

Ambassador Heller and the Secretary for Legal Affairs, Dr. Enrique Lagos, made presentations during the session.[2]/

a. Election of officers

Following the opening remarks, the meeting proceeded to elect the Chair of the Meeting of Government Experts to Prepare for the Sixth Inter-American Specialized Conference on Private International Law (CIDIP-VI). For these purposes, the head of the delegation of Mexico, Dr. Leonel Pereznieto, nominated Professor Alicia Perugini, representative of the delegation of Argentina, to serve as Chair. Her nomination was seconded by Dr. Cézar Amaral, head of the delegation of Brazil, and by Dr. Berta Feder, head of the delegation of Uruguay. At the request of the Acting Chair, Professor Perugini was elected by acclamation.

b. Adoption of the agenda

The Acting Chair invited Professor Perugini to take her place as Chair. She placed the draft agenda before the meeting for its consideration. The following draft agenda was approved without amendment[3]/.

I. Standardized commercial documentation for international transportation, with special reference to the 1989 Inter-American Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods by Road, with the possible incorporation of an additional protocol on bills of lading;

II. International loan contracts of a private nature, in particular, the uniformity and harmonization of secured transactions law; and

III. Conflict of laws on extracontractual liability, with an emphasis on competency of jurisdiction and applicable law with respect to civil international liability for transboundary pollution.

2. First plenary session

At 11:00 a.m. on February 14, 2000, the Chair of the meeting declared the session open. The meeting schedule was approved, and the Chair took up consideration of the agenda item “International loan contracts of a private nature, in particular the uniformity and harmonization of international laws governing transactions secured with movable property, commercial and financial guarantees.” On that occasion, the following delegations took the floor: Argentina, Canada, Jamaica, Mexico, Paraguay, the United States, Uruguay, and Venezuela.

The delegations pondered the methodology to be followed in debating the topic entitled “International loan contracts of a private nature and, in particular, the uniformity and harmonization of secured transactions law.”

It was agreed to start the discussions by first considering the principles governing a system of secured transactions, based on a summary of the working document presented by the delegation of the United States entitled “Legal Principles Governing a System of Secured Transactions,[4]/” and then to continue consideration of that topic on the basis of the working document presented by the delegation of Mexico, entitled “Principles Discussed by the Mexican Delegation in Light of the Different Proposals on the Secured Financing Topic.[5]/”

Pursuant to the agreement referred to in the preceding paragraph, the delegation of the United States summarized the essential principles set forth in its aforementioned working document and undertook to provide the summary in writing.[6]/ Those principles are:

a. Principle number one: creation of a unitary and uniform security interest;

b. Principle number two: the automatic extension of the original security interest to after-acquired property;

c. Principle number three: the automatic extension of the original security interest to the proceeds of the sale of the collateral to new generations of replacement or transformed goods;

d. Principle number four: separation of future goods acquired pursuant to a purchase money security;

e. Principle number five: ordinary course buyer exception;

f. Principle number six: agile and effective enforcement system:

i. Rapid repossession or adjudication of the collateral

ii. Private power to dispose of collateral

g. Principle number seven: notice by registration:

i. Broadening of the concept of security interests without dispossession and the publicity or adequate notice principle

ii. Registration of debtors and description of the collateral

In response to the question whether adopting a convention or a model law would be more appropriate, Mexico and the United States emphasized that domestic and international benefits would lead countries to incorporate the model law.

The delegations then proceeded to consider the principles set forth in the document presented by the Mexican delegation, title by title, and it was explained that references to secured transactions meant commercial secured interests. The delegation of the United States specified that they could in some cases include credit instruments in respect of transactions involving consumers. For its part, the Mexican delegation pointed out that the Draft Law would apply if the parties were commercial actors.

Furthermore, the document in question has the following seven titles:

a. Title I: Scope and general provisions;

b. Title II: Constitution and related provisions;

c. Title III: Perfection and related provisions;

d. Title IV: Registry and related provisions;

e. Title V: Priority rules;

f. Title VI: Enforcement of the security interest;

g. Title VII: Conflicts of laws.

The delegations reached general agreement on said principles, subject to later refinement, up to Chapter V of Title Three, and it was agreed that further discussion of the issue of electronic commerce and registry systems would be necessary. The delegation of Canada reserved the right to present observations since, for reasons beyond their control, its experts would not be able to arrive until the following day.

3. Second plenary session

The second plenary session began at 3:00 p.m. on February 14 and continued the consideration of “International loan contracts of a private nature, in particular, the uniformity and harmonization of secured transactions law.” The following delegations took the floor: Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, and the United States.

Regarding electronic registries, their validity, and their practical and legal consequences, an issue the delegations felt deserved special attention, the Chair, at the request of the delegation of the United States, gave the floor to Mr. Peter García, President of the International Association of Registries, who invited the delegations to attend the Association's annual conference. Mr. García also stressed the importance and practical impact of adopting electronic registry systems.

The delegation of Mexico proposed that a Drafting Committee be established to prepare a preliminary draft model law for CIDIP-VI. To that end, it was agreed to establish an electronic network of contacts among the experts, as a way to prepare a document in a few months, receive observations from the member states, and be able to finish the draft, which would be presented to CIDIP-VI.

The delegation of the United States seconded the proposal and suggested that informal meetings could be held toward the end of the year for that purpose, as well as another informal meeting of experts at the beginning of 2001, if necessary. CIDIP-VI could then be scheduled for the end of 2001.

After hearing the detailed presentations made by the delegations of Mexico and the United States on the principles contained in the documents submitted during the first session, the delegations reached a preliminary agreement on the remainder of Title III through Title V. It was agreed to continue discussing the remaining documents during the next session.

4. Third plenary session

The third plenary session began at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, February 15 and heard comments by the delegations of Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Ecuador, El Salvador, Jamaica, Mexico, Paraguay, United States, Uruguay and Venezuela.

The delegations agreed to form a Drafting Committee to write the draft Model Law, on the understanding that it would not be possible to complete such a complex task during the meeting and that work on it would continue via e-mail after the meeting ends. The delegation of Mexico, supported by the United States delegation, proposed holding another meeting of experts in the fall of 2000, possibly at the National Law Center in Tucson, Arizona.

It was also agreed that in writing the Draft Model Law, consideration should be given to electronic commerce, message transmission security, and electronic signatures, as well to the validity of electronic documents. In that connection, the Canadian delegation offered to give a presentation at the future meeting referred to in the previous paragraph on the two electronic registration systems in force in Canada: the Quebec system and the system used in the common law provinces.

The delegations then continued reviewing the legal principles governing secured financing, beginning with Title Six, “Enforcement of the Security Interest,” and ending with Title Seven, “Conflicts of Laws.” To facilitate discussion, the delegation of Mexico gave a thorough presentation, summarizing the issues.

On the topic of the enforcement of security interests, the delegation of Mexico underscored the need to establish an agile and effective judicial enforcement procedure in national legislation, which could either be pointed out in the preamble or in a note to the draft. The delegation of the United States suggested the need for extrajudicial action and that, if no consensus were reached, the meeting might consider the possibility of including a provision specifically designed to take into account the requirements of international financial markets, without thereby precluding other alternatives that could be included.

The delegation of Ecuador proposed that the draft should begin with a chapter devoted to definitions. Argentina and other delegations supported that proposal and it was agreed to consider it during the work to be done following the meeting.

The Canadian Delegation gave a presentation on the successful incorporation of legislation on secured financing in the civil law system of the Province of Quebec.

The delegation of Mexico requested that the Delegation of Guatemala be consulted with respect to the dates it has in mind for the Sixth Inter-American Specialized Conference on Private International Law (CIDIP-VI), which Guatemala is hosting.

The delegations agreed to constitute a working group with a view to focusing at the next session on developing a working methodology and making a first attempt at writing a preliminary draft Model Law, which would then be taken up, as agreed earlier, by the Drafting Committee. With that in mind, the Chair singled out two basic documents for the working group: the Model Law prepared by the National Law Center[7]/ and the document prepared by Mexico[8]/ on the principles to be applied.

5. Fourth plenary session

The fourth plenary session was held at 3:00 p.m. on February 15. As decided by consensus during the third session, the delegations formed a working group to examine the methodology for future work on doing a preliminary draft of the model law. At the suggestion of the Chair, Dr. Boris Kozolchyk of the delegation of the United States headed the group.

The group completed its work at 4:00 p.m., at which time the plenary session resumed and Dr. Kozolchyk gave his report. On the basis of that report and after hearing the observations made by Brazil, Ecuador, Guatemala, Mexico, the United States, Uruguay, and Venezuela, the following conclusions were reached:

a. The working documents that will serve as the basis for drafting the preliminary draft model law will be that prepared by the National Law Center[9]/, and that of the delegation of Mexico[10]/ with regard to the principles applicable to the aforementioned model law;

b. At the proposal of the delegation of Mexico, the delegation of the United States will prepare a comparative table of the aforementioned documents, in order to make the necessary adjustments in preparing the preliminary draft model law. A drafting committee will also participate in that process;

c. Member states that wish to participate in the drafting committee must communicate their interest to the Secretariat before March 1, 2000;

d. Once the comparative table is prepared, the General Secretariat will circulate it. The member states will make their observations and submit them to the Secretariat, so that they may be circulated to the other member states of the OAS;

e. The following deadlines will be borne in mind: the drafting of the annotated preliminary draft model law must be completed by July 1, 2000; and in the fall of 2000 a meeting of the drafting committee will be held in order to prepare the final version of the draft model law, subject to the availability of external funds to cover the expenses in full; and

f. It was recommended that the Permanent Council's Committee on Juridical and Political Affairs be asked to consider a date for holding CIDIP-VI in 2001, taking into account the progress of the preparatory work.

6. Fifth plenary session

The fifth plenary session of the Meeting of Government Experts to Prepare for the Sixth Inter-American Specialized Conference on Private International Law (CIDIP-VI) began at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, February 16, 2000. The delegates proceeded to consider the topic “Standardized commercial documentation for international transportation, with special reference to the 1989 Inter-American Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods by Road, with the possible incorporation of an additional protocol on bills of lading.” The delegations of Argentina, Brazil, Peru, United States, Uruguay, and Venezuela took the floor.

The delegation of the United States gave a presentation on electronic commerce in connection with the carriage of goods. The same delegation presented a proposed bill of lading form together with a report on it[11]/ and suggested that it be taken as a basis for developing a uniform bill format, to be discussed at the upcoming CIDIP-VI conference, that states will use as a guide or model.

Several delegations pointed out, in that connection, the need to decide on the law applicable to its validity and effects, especially with regard to the shipper’s liability. Various solutions were debated such as those already contemplated in the Inter-American Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods by Road (Montevideo, 1989) or in the Inter-American Convention on the Law Applicable to International Contracts (Mexico, 1994), or others to be established specifically in this case. It was agreed that this, too, was an aspect to be determined at the upcoming CIDIP-VI.

The delegation of Mexico requested that a recommendation be adopted inviting member states to incorporate into their domestic legislation the Model Law on Electronic Commerce of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) and to ratify the United Nations Convention on International Multimodal Transport of Goods.

7. Sixth plenary session

The sixth plenary session began at 3 p.m. on Wednesday, February 16 and was initially devoted to continuing consideration of the topic “Standardized commercial documentation for international transportation, with special reference to the 1989 Inter-American Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods by Road, with the possible incorporation of an additional protocol on bills of lading.”

Argentina proposed studying the possibility of including other items in the waybill or bill of lading, such as: notices, notification of loss, damage, or delay in delivery of merchandise, period of liability, prescription of actions, liability of the shipping agent, cumulative transport, inter alia.

After hearing comments by the delegations of Argentina, Mexico, and the United States, the delegations agreed on an approach similar to that adopted with respect to commercial guarantees. A working group chaired by the delegation of the United States would be formed to draft the bill of lading form and it would meet at the same time as the Drafting Committee for the Model Law on Commercial Guarantees, with a view to completing the drafting of the document. Member states that wish to participate in the working group should advise the Secretariat by March 1, 2000.

Thereafter, the plenary began consideration of the topic “Conflict of laws on extracontractual liability, with an emphasis on competency of jurisdiction and applicable law with respect to civil international liability for transboundary pollution.” Dr. Berta Feder, head of the Uruguayan delegation, gave a general presentation on the subject and introduced documents REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.5/00 and REG-CIDIP/VI-INF/4-00.

At the end of her presentation, the session was adjourned and discussion of this topic left for the next plenary session. Delegations agreed to postpone their commentaries until the following session.

8. Seventh plenary session

The seventh plenary session of the Meeting of Experts began at 10:00 a.m., on Thursday, February 17, 2000, and continued its consideration of the topic “Conflict of laws on extracontractual liability, with an emphasis on competency of jurisdiction and applicable law with respect to civil international liability for transboundary pollution.” The session started with the Delegate of Uruguay completing her presentation, initiated during the previous session, and clarifying some important aspects in this field. The delegations thanked her for her detailed presentation, as well as for the documents provided.

A discussion ensued regarding various aspects of this topic and, after hearing presentations by the delegations of Canada, United States, Guatemala, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela, the delegations agreed to establish a working group that would communicate via electronic means on terms similar to those for the other two preceding topics. The working group would be chaired by the delegation of Uruguay, and delegations wishing to participate should so advise the General Secretariat, giving their particulars, prior to March 1, 2000.

It was also agreed that member states in which instances of transboundary pollution had been verified should notify the other states via the General Secretariat, together with any pertinent judicial rulings or verdicts.

It was agreed that future work in this field should only include aspects related to international private law, excluding those related to public international law.

9. Eighth plenary session

The Meeting of Experts to Prepare for the Sixth Inter-American Specialized Conference on Private International Law, meeting in Washington, D.C., on February 14-18, 2000, approved the conclusions and recommendations listed in Chapter III.

10. Closing session

At 10:30 a.m., on Friday, February 18, 2000, the Meeting of Government Experts to Prepare for the Sixth Inter-American Specialized Conference on Private International Law (CIDIP-VI) was declared closed. At that time, a vote of thanks was extended to the Chair for her performance in conducting the meeting and to the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States.

III. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

CONCLUSIONS:

TOPIC I: Standardized commercial documentation for international transportation, with special reference to the 1989 Inter-American Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods by Road, with the possible incorporation of an additional protocol on bills of lading

1. A drafting group was established to prepare a draft inter-American bill of lading form.

2. The drafting group will be chaired by the delegation of the United States, based in the National Law Center.

3. Member states wishing to participate in the drafting group should so advise the Secretariat prior to March 1, 2000. The Secretariat will forward that information to the National Law Center.

4. When the form has been prepared, the General Secretariat will circulate it to all member states. Member states should make their observations and present them to the Secretariat to be circulated to the other OAS member states.

5. A meeting of the drafting group will be held in the last quarter of 2000 to prepare the final version of the form, subject to the availability of external funds to cover all costs.

6. Member states were invited to incorporate into their domestic legislation the Model Law on Electronic Commerce of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) and to ratify the United Nations Convention on International Multimodal Transport of Goods.

TOPIC II: International loan contracts of a private nature, in particular, the uniformity and harmonization of secured transactions law

1. A drafting committee will be established to write a draft model law on secured transactions.

2. The committee’s rapporteurs will be the delegations of Mexico and the United States.

3. Member states wishing to participate in the drafting group should so advise the Secretariat prior to March 1, 2000.

4. The working documents on which the preliminary draft model law will be based will be the document prepared by the National Law Center[12]/ and by the delegation of Mexico[13]/ regarding the principles applicable to the aforementioned model law.

5. The delegation of the United States will prepare a comparative table of the documents mentioned in the preceding paragraph to make the required clarifications during the process of writing the preliminary draft model law. It will collaborate with the drafting committee in this process.

6. When the comparative table is complete, the General Secretariat will circulate it. member states will make their observations and present them to the Secretariat for circulation to the other OAS member states.

7. The deadlines will be:

a. July 1, 2000: deadline to complete the drafting of the annotated preliminary draft model law; and

b. Toward the end of 2000: deadline to hold a meeting of the drafting committee to prepare the final version of the draft model law, subject to the availability of external funds to cover all costs.

TOPIC III: Conflict of laws on extracontractual liability, with an emphasis on competency of jurisdiction and applicable law with respect to civil international liability for transboundary pollution.

1. A drafting group will be established to prepare a draft inter-American convention on international competency of jurisdiction and applicable law in cases of civil liability for transboundary pollution.

2. The drafting group will be chaired by the delegation of Uruguay.

3. The working documents will be documents REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.5/00 and REG/CIDIP-VI/INF-4/00, on the legal bases for an inter-American convention on international competency of jurisdiction and applicable law in cases of civil liability for transboundary pollution.

4. Member states wishing to participate in the drafting group should so advise the Secretariat prior to March 1, 2000.

5. Member states with verified instances of transboundary pollution will notify other member states, via the General Secretariat, and advise them of any pertinent judicial rulings or verdicts.

6. It was agreed that future work in this field should only include aspects related to international private law, excluding those related to public international law.

7. Member states will present their observations regarding the documents to the General Secretariat, for forwarding to the other member states of the OAS.

8. Similarly, member states that so wish may send documents on the topic for distribution via the General Secretariat.

9. Toward the end of 2000, a meeting of the working group will be held to prepare the final version of the convention, subject to the availability of external funds to cover all costs.

RECOMMENDATION:

A decision was made to recommend to the Committee on Juridical and Political Affairs of the Permanent Council that it give consideration to the date for holding CIDIP-VI during 2001, bearing in mind the status of the preparatory work and Guatemala’s offer to host the conference.

ANNEX A

MEETING OF GOVERNMENT EXPERTS TO PREPARE FOR OEA/Ser.K/XXI

THE SIXTH INTER-AMERICAN SPECIALIZED CONFERENCE REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.2/00 rev. 1

ON PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW (CIDIP-VI) 15 February 2000

February 14 to 18, 2000 Original: Spanish

Washington, D.C.

AGENDA

I. Standardized commercial documentation for international transportation, with special reference to the 1989 Inter-American Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods by Road, with the possible incorporation of an additional protocol on bills of lading

II. International loan contracts of a private nature, in particular, the uniformity and harmonization of secured transactions law

III. Conflict of laws on extracontractual liability, with an emphasis on competency of jurisdiction and applicable law with respect to civil international liability for transboundary pollution

ANNEX B

MEETING OF GOVERNMENT EXPERTS TO PREPARE FOR OEA/Ser.K/XXI

THE SIXTH INTER-AMERICAN SPECIALIZED CONFERENCE REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.7/00 corr. 2

ON PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW (CIDIP-VI) 10 March 2000

February 14 to 18, 2000 Original: Textual

Washington, D.C.

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA

Head of Delegation

Lionel A. Hurst

Ambassador, Permanent Representative to the OAS

Representatives

Deborah-Mae Lovell

Minister-Counselor, Alternate Representative

to the OAS

Starret D. Greene

Minister-Counselor, Alternate Representative

to the OAS

ARGENTINA

Jefe de Delegación

Juan José Arcuri

Ministro, Representante Permanente Interino

ante la OEA

Representantes

Alicia Perugini

Directora Derecho de la Integración, Ministerio

de Justicia y Derechos Humanos

Mauricio Alice

Secretario, Representante Alterno ante la OEA

BRASIL

Chefe da Delegação

César Augusto De Souza Lima Amaral

Delegado Alterno do Brasil junto à OEA

Representantes

Ana Lélia Benincá Beltrame

Conselheira da Coordenação-Geral de Direito Internacional da

Consultoria Jurídica do Ministério das Relações Exteriores do Brasil

Clemente de Lima Baena Soares

Primeiro Secretário, Representante Alterno do Brasil junto à OEA

Geraldo Facó Vidigal

Representante da Ordem dos Advogados do Brasil (OAB)

Seção de São Paulo

CANADA

Head of Delegation

Kathryn Sabo

Senior Counsel, Private International Law Team, Public Law Policy Section

Department of Justice

Representatives

Manon Dostie

Counsel, Private International Law Team, Public Law Policy Section

Department of Justice

Antoine Leduc

Centre de recherche de droit privé et comparé,

Faculté de droit, Université McGill

Anne Lawson

Second Secretary , Alternate Representative to the OAS

CHILE

Jefe de Delegación

Carlos Portales

Embajador, Representante Permanente ante la OEA

Representantes

Miguel Angel González

Representante Alterno ante la OEA

COLOMBIA

Jefe de Delegación

Luis Alfredo Ramos

Embajador, Representante Permanente ante la OEA

Representantes

Enrique Gómez Pinzón

Director Oficina Comercial

Embajada de Colombia

Camilo Rojas

Representante Alterno ante la OEA

COSTA RICA

Jefe de Delegación

Hernán Castro Fernández

Embajador, Representante Permanente ante la OEA

Representantes

Jorge Rhenán Segura

Embajador, Representante Alterno ante la OEA

ECUADOR

Jefe de Delegación

Rafael Veintimilla Chiriboga

Ministro, Representante Interino ante la OEA

Representantes

Andrés Montalvo Sosa

Representante Alterno ante la OEA

Vladimir Villalba Paredes

Delegado

EL SALVADOR

Jefe de Delegación

Margarita Escobar

Embajadora, Representante Permanente ante la OEA

Representantes

Eduardo Hernández

Consejero, Representante Alterno ante la OEA

Claudia Rebeca Atanacio de Basagoitia

Asistente Presidencia, Corte Suprema de Justicia

Verónica Barba Nuñez

Corte Suprema de Justicia

GRENADA

Head of Delegation

Denis G. Antoine

Ambassador, Permanent Representative to the OAS

Representatives

Ronald Straker

Alternate Representative to the OAS

GUATEMALA

Jefe de Delegación

Alfonso Quiñonez

Embajador, Representante Permanente ante la OEA

Representantes

Alma Gladys Cordero

Consejera, Representante Alterna ante la OEA

HONDURAS

Jefe de Delegación

Laura Elena Nuñez Flores

Embajador, Representante Permanente ante la OEA

Representantes

María Guadalupe Carías

Consejero, Representante Alterno ante la OEA

JAMAICA

Head of Delegation

Richard L. Bernal

Ambassador, Permanent Representative to the OAS

Representatives

Rolande Pryce

First Secretary, Alternate Representative to the OAS

MÉXICO

Jefe de Delegación

Leonel Pereznieto

Asesor Externo de la Consultoría Jurídica de

la Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores

Representantes

Laura Trigueros

Asesora Externa de la Consultoría Jurídica de

la Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores

Elí Rodríguez Martínez

Secretario Técnico de la Comisión de Asesores

Externos de Derecho Internacional Privado de la

Consultoría Jurídica de la Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores

NICARAGUA

Jefe de Delegación

Alvaro José Sevilla Siero

Embajador, Representante Permanente ante la OEA

Representantes

Manuel Salvador Abaunza

Ministro Consejero, Representante Alterno ante la OEA

PANAMÁ

Jefe de Delegación

Max José López Cornejo

Embajador, Representante Alterno ante la OEA

Representantes

Nisla Lorena Aparicio

Consejera Legal, Representante Alterno ante la OEA

PARAGUAY

Jefe de Delegación

Diego Abente Brun

Embajador, Representante Permanente ante la OEA

Representantes

Julio Duarte Van Humbeck

Primer Secretario, Representante Alterno ante la OEA

Carlos Ruffinelli

Experto Gubernamental

PERÚ

Jefe de Delegación

Beatriz M. Ramacciotti

Embajadora, Representante Permanente ante la OEA

Representantes

María Carlota Valenzuela de Puelles

Asesora Legal, Representante Alterna ante la OEA

REPÚBLICA DOMINICANA

Jefe de Delegación

Mayerlyn Cordero Díaz

Consejero, Representante Alterno ante la OEA

TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO

Head of Delegation

Michael A. Arneaud

Ambassador, Permanent Representative to the OAS

Representative

Sandra Honore B.

Counselor, Alternate Representative to the OAS

UNITED STATES

Head of Delegation

Jeffrey Kovar

Assistant Legal Adviser for Private International Law

U.S. Department of State

Representatives

Harold Burman

Executive Director, Advisory Committee on

Private International Law

U.S Department of State

Joan E. Segerson

Counselor for Resources Management

Alternate Representative to the OAS

U.S. Department of State

Boris Kozolchyk

Director

National Law Center for Inter-American Free Trade

Tucson, Arizona

Jose Astigarraga Davis

Mullins and Grossman, P.A.

Miami, Florida

Peter Bloch

Office of General Counsel for International Affairs

U. S. Department of Transportation

Washington, D.C.

Stanley Braverman

U.S. Department of Transportation

Washington, D.C.

Kenneth Hoffman

Chair

North American Committee on Surface Transportation

Austin, Texas

David van Hoogstraten

Office of the Legal Advisor

Oceans, Environmental and Scientific Affairs

U.S. Department of State

Paul Herrup

Office of Foreign Litigation

Civil Division

U.S. Department of State

URUGUAY

Jefe de Delegación

Berta Feder

Directora de la Dirección de Asuntos de Derecho Internacional

del Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores de Uruguay

Representante

Ricardo Varela

Consejero, Representante Alterno ante la OEA

VENEZUELA

Jefe de Delegación

Virginia Contreras Navarrete

Embajadora, Representante Permanente ante la OEA

Representantes

Manuel Rodríguez

Consejero, Representante Alterno ante la OEA

Esthela Rosenblatt

Representante Alterna ante la OEA

Luis Niño

Representante Alterno ante la OEA

OBSERVADORES PERMANENTES ANTE LA OEA

France

Jean Paul Barré

Ambassador, Permanent Observer to the OAS

ORGANISMOS ESPECIALIZADOS DE LA OEA

Comisión Interamericana de Mujeres (CIM)

Carmen Lomellin

Secretaria Ejecutiva

Mercedes Kremenetzky

Especialista Principal

Inter-American Juridical Committee (CJI)

Keith Highet

Chairman, Inter-American Juridical Committee

INVITADOS ESPECIALES

Dale Beck Furnish

College of Law, Arizona State University

Kevin J. O’Shea

Deputy Director

National Law Center for Inter-American Free Trade

Mariana Silveira

Project Coordinator

National Law Center for Inter-American Free Trade

John M. Wilson

Coordinator

National Law Center for Inter-American Free Trade

John A. Spanogle

George Washington University

Paul B. Larsen

Adjunct Professor

Georgetown University Law Center

Maria Lameiro

Senior Analyst

Office of Transportation

Office of the Secretary

Viktor Dabenekkiy

Observer Alternative

Russia

ORGANIZACIÓN DE LOS ESTADOS AMERICANOS

Enrique Lagos

Subsecretario de Asuntos Jurídicos

Jean Michel Arrighi

Director

Departamento de Derecho Internacional

Laura Haran

Secretario de Comisión

Secretaría del Consejo Permanente

Kathleen Lannan

Oficial Jurídico

Departamento de Derecho Internacional

Morton Sklar

President

OAS Administrative Tribunal

Sergio Biondo

OAS Administrative Tribunal

Cesar Parga

Consultor, Unidad de Comercio

ANNEX C

REUNIÓN DE EXPERTOS GUBERNAMENTALES OEA/Ser.K/XXI

PREPARATORIA DE LA SEXTA CONFERENCIA REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.1/00 corr.2

ESPECIALIZADA INTERAMERICANA SOBRE 14 March 2000

DERECHO INTERNACIONAL PRIVADO(CIDIP-VI) TEXTUAL

14 a 18 de febrero de 2000

Washington, D.C.

LISTA DE DOCUMENTOS REGISTRADOS POR LA SECRETARÍA

HASTA EL 14 DE MARZO DE 2000

|NÚMERO DEL DOCUEMENTO |Título[14]/ |Idioma[15]/ |

| | | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.1/00 |Lista de documentos |Textual |

|RE00114T | | |

| | | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.1/00 corr.1 |Lista de documentos |Textual |

|RE00136T | | |

| | | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.1/00 corr.2 |Lista de documentos |Textual |

|RE00141T | | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.2/00 |Proyecto de Temario |E I F P |

|RE00115 | | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.2/00 corr. 1 |Proyecto de Temario |I |

|RE00119 | | |

| | | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.2/00 rev.1 |Temario |E I F P |

|RE00129 | | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.3/00 |Proyecto de Calendario | E I F P |

|RE00116 | | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.3/00 corr. 1 |Proyecto de Calendario |E |

|RE00118 | | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.3/00 rev. 1 |Proyecto de Calendario |E I F P |

|RE00120 | | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.4/00 |Background and List of Documents for the Preparatory Meeting of |E I F P |

|RE00117 |Government Experts for the Sixth Inter-American Specialized Conference | |

| |on International Private Law (CIDIP-VI) | |

| | | |

| |Conflicto de Leyes en Materia de Responsabilidad Extracontractual, con | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.5/00 |Enfasis en el Tema de la Jurisdicción Competente y las Leyes Aplicables|E I F P |

|RE00121 |Respecto de la Responsabilidad Civil Internacional por Contaminación | |

| |Transfronteriza | |

| |(Documento preparado por la Delegación de Uruguay) | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.6/00 |Informe de la Reunión de Expertos Gubernamentales Preparatoria de la |E I F P |

|RE00133 |Sexta Conferencia Especializada Interamericana sobre Derecho | |

| |Internacional Privado (CIDIP-VI) | |

| | | |

| |Informe de la Reunión de Expertos Gubernamentales Preparatoria de la | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.6/00 corr.1 |Sexta Conferencia Especializada Interamericana sobre Derecho |E I F P |

|RE00137 |Internacional Privado (CIDIP-VI) | |

| | | |

| |Informe de la Reunión de Expertos Gubernamentales Preparatoria de la | |

| |Sexta Conferencia Especializada Interamericana sobre Derecho | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.6 corr.2 |Internacional Privado (CIDIP-VI) |E I F P |

|RE00138 | | |

| | | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.7/00 |Lista de Participantes |Textual |

|RE00134 |Reunión de Expertos Gubernamentales Preparatoria de la Sexta | |

| |Conferencia Especializada Interamericana sobre Derecho Internacional | |

| |Privado (CIDIP-VI) | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.7/00 corr.1 |Lista de Participantes |Textual |

|RE00135 |Reunión de Expertos Gubernamentales Preparatoria de la Sexta | |

| |Conferencia Especializada Interamericana sobre Derecho Internacional | |

| |Privado (CIDIP-VI) | |

| | | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/doc.7/00 corr.2 |Lista de Participantes |Textual |

|RE00138 |Reunión de Expertos Gubernamentales Preparatoria de la Sexta | |

| |Conferencia Especializada Interamericana sobre Derecho Internacional | |

| |Privado (CIDIP-VI) | |

| | | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/INF. | | |

| |Palabras del Dr. Enrique Lagos, Subsecretario de Asuntos Jurídicos, en | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/INF.1/00 |la sesión inaugural de la Reunión de Expertos Gubernamentales |Textual |

|RE00123 |Preparatoria de la Sexta Conferencia Interamericana sobre Derecho | |

| |Internacional Privado (CIDIP-VI) | |

| | | |

| | | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/INF.2/00 |Principios discutidos por la Delegación Mexicana a la luz de las |E I |

|RE00124 |diferentes propuestas en materia de garantías mobiliarias | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/INF.3/00 |Principios Jurídicos de un Sistema de Garantías Mobiliarias (Documento |E I |

|RE00125 |presentado por la Delegación de los Estados Unidos) | |

| | | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/INF.4/00 |Bases para una Convención Interamericana sobre Ley aplicable y |E I |

|RE00126 |Jurisdicción Internacional Competente en casos de Responsabilidad Civil| |

| |por Contaminación Transfronteriza (Documento presentado por la | |

| |Delegación de Uruguay) | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/INF.4/00 corr.1 |Bases para una Convención Interamericana sobre Ley aplicable y |E I |

|RE00132 |Jurisdicción Internacional Competente en casos de Responsabilidad Civil| |

| |por Contaminación Transfronteriza (Documento presentado por la | |

| |Delegación de Uruguay) | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/INF.5/00 |Summary of REG/CIDIP-VI/ INF.3/00 |E I |

|RE00127 |Legal Principles Governing a System of Secured Transactions | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/INF.6/00 |Uniform Inter-American Bill of Lading for the International Carriage of|E I |

|RE00128 |Goods by Road: Analysis and Proposed Form Report (Prepared by the | |

| |National Law Center for Inter-American Free Trade) | |

|REG/CIDIP-VI/INF.7/00 |Sugerencias y Prioridades de Trabajo para el Transporte de Mercaderías |E I |

|RE00131 |a Nivel Interamericano | |

| |(Documento presentado por los Estados Unidos) | |

-----------------------

[1]. See resolution CP/RES. 732 (1173/98).

[2] See REG/CIDIP-VI/INF-1/00.

[3]. See Annex B.

[4]. See document REG/CIDIP-VI/INF-3/00.

[5]. See document REG/CIDIP-VI/INF-2/00.

[6]. See document REG/CIDIP-VI/INF-3/00.

[7]. See document RE/CIDIP-VI/doc.4/98.

[8]. See document RE/CIDIP-VI/INF.2/00.

[9]. See document RE/CIDIP-VI/doc.4/98.

[10]. See document RE/CIDIP-VI/INF.2/00.

[11]. See document REG/CIDIP-CI/INF.6/00.

[12]. See document RE/CIDIP-VI/doc. 4/98.

[13]. See document RE/CIDIP-VI/INF.2/00.

[14]. Título registrado en el idioma original

[15]. E = español, I = inglés, F = francés, P = portugués

-----------------------

RE00139E05

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download