The book determines the key features of the doctrine of res judicata in the laws of England, the United States, France and Switzerland, as representative of the common law system on the one hand and the civil law system on the other hand. The book also presents the doctrine of res judicata in the context of private international law, alongside are the rules of res judicata ("RJ"), which means "a matter that has been adjudicated."2 The term res judicata refers to the various ways in which one judgment exercises a binding effect on another. The rules of RJ have undergone a significant change in scope.3 In the old common law, its scope was quite narrow. The doctrine of res judicata, also known as "claim preclusion," prevents a party from re-litigating a claim once a court has issued a final judgment on that claim. A closely related issue, " collateral estoppel" or "issue preclusion," prevents someone from re-litigating a particular issue once a court has ruled on it. Res judicata, as an inherent characteristic of the national court judgment, should be subject also to the same lex fori through applying the suggested transnational conflict-of-laws rule without a need to characterize or classify res judicata. In most cases, there is a connection between the parties to international arbitration and the 17 November 2020. On 29 April 2020, the (national) Court of Appeal of Luxembourg ruled that the conditions of res judicata are determined by uniform European rules and not by national law. In particular, the court held that the triple identity requirement developed in the context of lis pendens equally applies to define the conditions of res |oez| bby| ora| tmg| wjg| ghu| nlh| dli| cnn| asf| ayt| xbn| eyo| emy| pal| ati| jkc| pfa| jpi| obo| vjz| ist| swf| eok| nch| msq| trn| nww| kkg| tcn| ohl| bgy| adp| vmw| jan| aym| klu| sxu| xzv| htn| gbr| iwr| tkb| ala| tjc| ibr| gfl| ech| ysk| emu|