Recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters in the Brussels I Recast, and some lessons from it and the recent Hague Conventions for the Hague Judgments Project

Paul Beaumont, Lara Walker

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article looks at the rules on the recognition and enforcement of civil and commercial judgments in the EU and internationally. It provides a detailed description of the procedure for recognition (if requested) and enforcement introduced by the new Brussels I in January 2015 and compares this with the previous procedure. The article then seeks to provide suitable recommendations for the procedure on recognition and enforcement in a future Hague Judgments Convention. In order to inform these recommendations, the article analyses the current procedures in Brussels I, the Hague Choice of Court Convention and the Hague Maintenance Convention 2007. The authors argue that the substantive grounds for non-recognition/enforcement (ie those unrelated to the jurisdictional basis of the original judgment) could be reduced to manifestly contrary to public policy and irreconcilable judgments. It would also be helpful if there were minimum harmonisation of the enforcement procedure so that national and international grounds for non-enforcement could be considered in the same set of proceedings.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)31 - 63
Number of pages34
JournalJournal of Private International Law
Volume11
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 15 Jun 2015

Fingerprint

harmonization
public policy
EU

Keywords

  • Brussels I Regulation
  • recognition and enforcement of judgments
  • grounds for refusal
  • public policy
  • procedural fraud
  • lack of notice
  • natural justice
  • default judgments
  • EU
  • Hague Conference on Private International Law
  • judgments project
  • notification of the defendant
  • excessive damages
  • explanatory report
  • actual enforcement

Cite this

@article{86f50e9415f94b908901f84eb12403e4,
title = "Recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters in the Brussels I Recast, and some lessons from it and the recent Hague Conventions for the Hague Judgments Project",
abstract = "This article looks at the rules on the recognition and enforcement of civil and commercial judgments in the EU and internationally. It provides a detailed description of the procedure for recognition (if requested) and enforcement introduced by the new Brussels I in January 2015 and compares this with the previous procedure. The article then seeks to provide suitable recommendations for the procedure on recognition and enforcement in a future Hague Judgments Convention. In order to inform these recommendations, the article analyses the current procedures in Brussels I, the Hague Choice of Court Convention and the Hague Maintenance Convention 2007. The authors argue that the substantive grounds for non-recognition/enforcement (ie those unrelated to the jurisdictional basis of the original judgment) could be reduced to manifestly contrary to public policy and irreconcilable judgments. It would also be helpful if there were minimum harmonisation of the enforcement procedure so that national and international grounds for non-enforcement could be considered in the same set of proceedings.",
keywords = "Brussels I Regulation, recognition and enforcement of judgments, grounds for refusal, public policy, procedural fraud, lack of notice, natural justice, default judgments, EU, Hague Conference on Private International Law, judgments project, notification of the defendant, excessive damages, explanatory report, actual enforcement",
author = "Paul Beaumont and Lara Walker",
year = "2015",
month = "6",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1080/17536235.2015.1033197",
language = "English",
volume = "11",
pages = "31 -- 63",
journal = "Journal of Private International Law",
issn = "1744-1048",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters in the Brussels I Recast, and some lessons from it and the recent Hague Conventions for the Hague Judgments Project

AU - Beaumont, Paul

AU - Walker, Lara

PY - 2015/6/15

Y1 - 2015/6/15

N2 - This article looks at the rules on the recognition and enforcement of civil and commercial judgments in the EU and internationally. It provides a detailed description of the procedure for recognition (if requested) and enforcement introduced by the new Brussels I in January 2015 and compares this with the previous procedure. The article then seeks to provide suitable recommendations for the procedure on recognition and enforcement in a future Hague Judgments Convention. In order to inform these recommendations, the article analyses the current procedures in Brussels I, the Hague Choice of Court Convention and the Hague Maintenance Convention 2007. The authors argue that the substantive grounds for non-recognition/enforcement (ie those unrelated to the jurisdictional basis of the original judgment) could be reduced to manifestly contrary to public policy and irreconcilable judgments. It would also be helpful if there were minimum harmonisation of the enforcement procedure so that national and international grounds for non-enforcement could be considered in the same set of proceedings.

AB - This article looks at the rules on the recognition and enforcement of civil and commercial judgments in the EU and internationally. It provides a detailed description of the procedure for recognition (if requested) and enforcement introduced by the new Brussels I in January 2015 and compares this with the previous procedure. The article then seeks to provide suitable recommendations for the procedure on recognition and enforcement in a future Hague Judgments Convention. In order to inform these recommendations, the article analyses the current procedures in Brussels I, the Hague Choice of Court Convention and the Hague Maintenance Convention 2007. The authors argue that the substantive grounds for non-recognition/enforcement (ie those unrelated to the jurisdictional basis of the original judgment) could be reduced to manifestly contrary to public policy and irreconcilable judgments. It would also be helpful if there were minimum harmonisation of the enforcement procedure so that national and international grounds for non-enforcement could be considered in the same set of proceedings.

KW - Brussels I Regulation

KW - recognition and enforcement of judgments

KW - grounds for refusal

KW - public policy

KW - procedural fraud

KW - lack of notice

KW - natural justice

KW - default judgments

KW - EU

KW - Hague Conference on Private International Law

KW - judgments project

KW - notification of the defendant

KW - excessive damages

KW - explanatory report

KW - actual enforcement

U2 - 10.1080/17536235.2015.1033197

DO - 10.1080/17536235.2015.1033197

M3 - Article

VL - 11

SP - 31

EP - 63

JO - Journal of Private International Law

JF - Journal of Private International Law

SN - 1744-1048

IS - 1

ER -