At 3am on Wednesday 16th April 2025, after three years of intense negotiations, WHO member states (minus the United States) preliminarily consented to a final text of the so-called Pandemic Agreement. The text will now be considered for final adoption at the upcoming World Health Assembly meeting in May 2025, where – barring any major upsets – it is expected to be adopted. At a time when global news is replete with breakdowns in multilateralism and the ripping up of international law rulebooks, this decisive step towards a new accord on pandemic prevention and response has been hailed by the WHO Director-General as a reminder that “multilateralism is alive and well”, demonstrating that “in our divided world, nations can still work together to find common ground, and a shared response to shared threats”. This blog post provides some reflections on the ostensible achievements of the Pandemic Agreement and the main sticking points raised until the final hours of negotiation.
X v Amstelveen Equity Trust BV et al. Holds (wrongly imo) that Article 26 Brussels Ia submission applies to non-EU defendants, too. Then grants an A33-34 stay viz Dutch defendants and, in a show of cakeism, a ‘metoo’ stay against the Turkish defendants. – Go Health Pro
If you do use the blog for research or database purposes, citation would be appreciated, to the blog as a whole and /or to specific blog posts. Many have suggested I should turn the blog into a paid for, subscription service however I have resisted doing so. Proper reference to how the blog is useful … Read more
