Views
From Symbolism to Substance: Comity and Judicial Reform in South Africa’s Foreign Judgments Regime
South Africa occupies a strategic position in African and Global South trade networks, yet its economy continues to lag behind its BRICS partners and many of its African peers. A recurring, if underexamined, contributor to this underperformance is the state of its private international law governing the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments (REFJ). The article, published in the Journal of African Law (2026), investigates why and how the principle of comity might help resolve this issue.
The empirical picture is striking. Of the reported South African REFJ cases collated for this study, roughly 44 per cent of foreign judgments brought for enforcement are refused. Contrary to what one might expect, the leading cause is rarely fraud or public policy. Instead, over half of all refusals (53 per cent) turn on a single, narrow ground: the rendering court’s lack of “international competence” under South African law. Under the framework laid down in Jones v Krok (1995), a foreign court is internationally competent only where the debtor was resident in, or voluntarily submitted to, that court’s jurisdiction. Every other basis for jurisdiction recognised elsewhere – the place of contractual performance, the place where harm occurred, or a valid choice-of-court agreement standing alone- is, on the weight of authority, insufficient.
Persistent and Reasonable Efforts in the Field of Cross-Border Service of Documents. Continuation or Stay of Proceedings?
A. The Impetus for Presenting the Issue
In light of the publication of three judgments of the Thessaloniki First Instance Court concerning the service of documents in Contracting States to the 1965 Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters [hereinafter: HSC], the issue examined was whether proceedings may continue despite the absence of a certificate of service from the State addressed. In this context, a decisive role for the judge is played by the answer to the question whether “persistent efforts” within the meaning of the Greek version of Article 15(2)(c) HSC, or “reasonable efforts” (in the English-language formulation), were undertaken by the competent authorities of the State addressed in order to obtain a certificate. The same issue arises under the relevant EU Regulation (Article 22 Regulation 2020/1784), concerning cross-border service within the EU. Finally, the very recent amendment of the Greek Code of Civil Procedure, introducing new Article 134A GCCP, is also of particular interest.
The discussion will begin with the case law referred to above, examined in the light of the HSC (B). This will be followed by a reference to the corresponding provision of the EU Regulations (C). Next, a preliminary account will be given of the recent provision of Article 134A GCCP and its innovative features (D). This will be followed by an analysis of the terms “persistent effort” and “reasonable effort” (E-F). The study concludes with a detailed presentation of German legal scholarship (G), followed by a brief conclusion (H).
Speaking for the Dead: Idziski and the Forum for Post-Mortem Likeness Claims
by Marta Liduma, LLB candidate in International and European Law, University of Groningen
A Dutch actor dies in March. By April, his likeness starts to appear widely. Generated videos show him promoting a supplement, and one clip ends with a link to a shop selling shirts printed with his face. A single man in Germany creates all of this, in large quantities, using a dozen deceased performers.
Who can sue, and in which court?
Dutch law answers the first question readily. Article 21 of the Auteurswet allows publication to be resisted when a reasonable interest of the portrayed person, or after his death of one of his surviving relatives, opposes it. Article 25a, in the same paragraph of the Act, identifies those relatives as the parents, the spouse or registered partner and the children, each of whom may act independently of the others. Article 21 addresses whoever holds the copyright for the portrait, which poses a problem for a generated video that may have no author at all. However, Article 35 makes the publication of a portrait without entitlement an offence for anybody, and Dutch practice has long read the two provisions together. German law follows a similar design. Section 22 of the Kunsturhebergesetz (KUG) requires the consent of the family of the deceased (Angehörige) for ten years after death, and defines them as the surviving spouse or registered partner and the children, failing whom the parents.
The second question leads to the Court of Justice and its judgment on 18 June 2026 in Idziski (C-232/25). The concentrating head of Article 7(2) Brussels Ia puts two questions to a single individual. Does the content identify you, and where are your interests centred? Death creates separation between these questions, and current case law keeps them apart.
News
Praxis des Internationalen Privat- und Verfahrensrechts (IPRax) 5/2026: Abstracts
The latest issue of the „Praxis des Internationalen Privat- und Verfahrensrechts“ (IPRax) features the following articles:
Clarity in Complexity: Nadia Rusinova’s Practical Handbook on EU Family Law, Part II – International Child Abduction Litigation
In an earlier post on this blog, we presented Part 1 of Nadia Rusinova’s Practical Handbook on EU Family Law, highlighting its success in bringing clarity and structure to the complex framework of cross-border family law in the European Union.
The project has now been extended with the publication of Part 2: Litigating International Child Abduction Cases under the 1980 Hague Convention in the EU (2026, ISBN 978-619-93392-1-3). While Part 1 provides the conceptual and terminological foundations, Part 2 applies them to one of the most demanding areas of cross-border family law: international child abduction proceedings.
The new handbook may be viewed and downloaded free of charge.
New book: Droit International Privé by Marc Fallon, Jean-Yves Carlier and Stéphanie Francq
The standard textbook of Belgian Private International Law in French has just been published in its fourth edition (by Larcier Intersentia). The great scholar François Rigaux published the first version of this précis in 1977-1979 (in two volumes). The second edition followed in 1987-1993, and the third in 2005. While the third edition comprised a single volume, it comes as no surprise that the number of legislative texts and court decisions have obliged the authors to return to the two-volume format. Printed in small typeset and on thin paper, the entire work surpasses 2000 pages. The book forms part of the series Precis de la faculté de droit et de criminologie de l’UCLouvain. The two volumes are truly a “travail de moine” (a very detailed and painstaking work that requires much time and patience).