Generally, where proceedings are stayed, there are three stages which must be distinguished for determining delay. First, the proceedings before the domestic court. Any unjustifiable delay at this point would amount to a direct breach of Article 6. Second, the transfer of proceedings to the foreign court. Delay at this stage would be less justifiable where, for instance, there was known to be a heavy backlog of cases. Notwithstanding, the “normal lapses of time stemming from the transfer of the cases” are not to be regarded as unjustified. Third, the proceedings before the foreign court. At the second and third stages, although any unreasonable delay by the foreign court will amount to a direct breach by that court, there could also be an indirect breach by the domestic court, but only to the extent that the party suffered, or risked suffering, a flagrant breach.
Employees increasingly see the global environment as offering improved opportunities for their families and may seek transfers abroad as part of that process. This study examines how companies deal with the employee who is keen to be transferred abroad, including how costs can be managed whilst ensuring employee retention. Further, it considers how responsible the transferring company is for ensuring the family of the employee is accepted abroad; are compounds the right environment for families, should accommodation be the responsibility of the company, and what should be done about employment opportunities for other family members such as spouses. Finally, it explores the degree to which this can cause a ‘brain-drain' in the home country, as employees seek moves to overseas offices. As the world tightens working visas as a result of the global recession, this study offers a timely approach to a long-standing conundrum.