Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCANTEKIN, Kayahan
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-05T12:13:02Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.citationFlorence : European University Institute, 2020en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1814/67290
dc.descriptionDefence date: 1 June 2020 (Online)en
dc.descriptionExamining Board: Professor Giovanni Sartor (EUI, Supervisor); Professor Deirdre M. Curtin (EUI); Professor Horatia Muir-Watt (Sciences Po); Professor Dan Jerker B. Svantesson (Bond University)en
dc.description.abstractThis study examines how jurisdiction rules adapt to global data flows. To achieve this objective, a new methodological tool called the General Model of Conflicts Adjudication (GMCA) is formulated and used to analyze developments in American rules of personal jurisdiction and jurisdiction to prescribe which happened in parallel to technological and economic change. Chapter 1 examines how global data flows create economic and social dynamics that complicate the problems that conflict of laws rules must solve and explains the theoretical basis of the GMCA. Chapter 2 tests the explanatory power of the GMCA by using it to analyze the development of American personal jurisdiction rules starting with the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case of International Shoe (1945). The Chapter traces the adaptation of American conflict rules to technological developments, from the advent of the automobile to the proliferation of multinational corporations and the Internet. Commentary is made on recent important cases, such as Daimler (2014), BNSF Railway (2017), Bristol-Myers Squibb (2017), and Plixer v. Scrutinizer (2018). Apparent patterns in the development of the law and their normative implications are discussed using the GMCA. Chapter 3 focuses on the Microsoft. v. U.S. litigation (2016-2018) that concerned the extraterritorial reach of U.S. court orders in collecting electronic evidence stored in datacenters located abroad. The extensive documentation produced by the various governments, law enforcement agencies, service providers, and user groups that wanted to be involved in the dispute is examined and perceived interests of these stakeholders are determined. Commentary is made on the scholarly suggestions made for the solution of the problem. The CLOUD Act (2018), passed by the U.S. Congress to solve the issue, is examined and the comity-based solution of the Act is assessed within the GMCA. The work concludes with a summary of findings and a suggestion to use the GMCA in studying the ‘Europeanization’ of private international law.en
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherEuropean University Instituteen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesEUIen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesLAWen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesPhD Thesisen
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccessen
dc.subject.lcshConflict of laws
dc.subject.lcshInternational and municipal law
dc.titleGlobal data flows and conflict of laws : a proposal for a new methodologyen
dc.typeThesisen
dc.identifier.doi10.2870/965966
eui.subscribe.skiptrue
dc.embargo.terms2024-06-01
dc.date.embargo2024-06-01


Files associated with this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record