Conflict of Laws
  • About
  • Editorial board
  • Subscription
  • Submission
  • Materials
  • Contact
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu

Legalisation attachments in Belgium

May 16, 2007/in /by Thalia Kruger
image_pdfimage_print

In Belgium a practice has developed whereby the Belgian embassies in foreign countries may attach a ‘warning’ when legalising a document. The most frequent example is for repudiation. The warning note will then indicate to the future receiver of the document that according to the embassy, the document concerns the unilateral dissolution of a divorce.

This practice has been affirmed in an ‘Arrêté royal’ (published in the Moniteur belge of 11 January 2007). In the past the warning could be inserted on the legalisation sticker or on a separate sheet of paper attached to the document and legalisation, but according to the new rules only the last option remains.

It seems that such warning is most often respected in practice. However, strictly speaking the warning is not legally binding, as it is the competence of the authority in Belgium where the document is presented to consider its content and whether it can be recognised.

Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on X
  • Share on WhatsApp
  • Share on Pinterest
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Share on Vk
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Thalia Kruger https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Thalia Kruger2007-05-16 17:34:022007-05-16 17:34:02Legalisation attachments in Belgium

Categories

  • Views
  • News

Most Recent Posts

  • Support in cross-border transactions by Adults: Contract law vs capacity law August 12, 2026
  • Recognition of Italian Extrajudicial Divorces in Tunisia — Between Methodological Uncertainty and the Need to Preserve Continuity of Personal Status Across Borders August 9, 2026
  • Private International Law and European Society August 4, 2026
  • The New Zealand Supreme Court’s judgment in Kea Investments Ltd v Wikeley on anti-enforcement relief August 3, 2026
  • Beyond Domicile: The BHP Litigation and the Functional Interconnection of Public and Private International Law August 3, 2026
  • Conflicts of jurisdiction in Senegal: lesson from the Senegalese Supreme Court on Lis Pendens and the Exequatur of foreign judgments July 27, 2026
  • Adoption in the proposal for a European Parenthood Regulation July 21, 2026
  • Copyright, Targeting and Geo-Blocking: The CJEU Stirs the Pot July 15, 2026
  • A Follow-Up: The German Judges Association’s Response to the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions July 15, 2026
  • Private International Law Dimensions of Singapore’s New Legislation to Combat Online Harms July 14, 2026
  • The 1961 HCCH Apostille Convention: Why All African Countries Should Ratify It? — Insights from Judicial Practice in Africa July 14, 2026
  • The enforcement of an advance on costs for substitute performance at the expense of a Russian debtor in German-French legal relations July 2, 2026
  • “Yes, in principle, but not quite there yet…” – Some Observations on the Public Consultation on the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions June 29, 2026
  • Judgment Mobility Rules in India’s Private International Law Regime: No place for a revision au fond? June 26, 2026
  • Nothing to See Here: The CJEU’s Decision in Case C-232/25 Idzinski June 18, 2026
Link to: MPI Comments on the Green Paper on the Attachment of Bank Accounts Link to: MPI Comments on the Green Paper on the Attachment of Bank Accounts MPI Comments on the Green Paper on the Attachment of Bank Accounts Link to: Fraude à la loi Link to: Fraude à la loi Fraude à la loi
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top