Views
Alexander Vik v Deutsche Bank AG: the powers of the English court outside of the jurisdiction in contempt of court proceedings
By Diana Kostina
The recent Court of Appeal judgment in Alexander Vik and Deutsche Bank AG [2018] EWCA Civ 2011confirmedthat contempt of court applications for alleged non-compliance with a court order can be served on a party outside the jurisdiction of England and Wales. The Court of Appeal’s judgment also contains a useful reminder of the key principles governing the powers of English courts to serve defendants outside of the jurisdiction.
Background
This Court of Appeal’s judgment is the latest development in the litigation saga which has been ongoing between Deutsche Bank (‘the Bank’) and Alexander Vik, the Norwegian billionaire residing in Monaco (‘Mr Vik’) and his company, Sebastian Holdings Inc (‘the Company’). The Bank has been trying to enforce a 2013 judgment debt, which is now estimated to be around US $ 320 million.
Within the enforcement proceedings, the English court made an order under CPR 71.2 requiring Mr Vik to appear before the court to provide relevant information and documents regarding the assets of the Company. This information would have assisted the Bank in its efforts to enforce the judgment against him. Although Mr Vik did appear in court, the Bank argued that he had deliberately failed to disclose important documents and lied under oath. Accordingly, the Bank argued that Mr Vik should be held in contempt of court by way of a committal order.
To obtain a committal order, the Bank could have applied under either CPR 71.8 or CPR 81.4. The difference is that the former rule provides for a simple and streamlined committal procedure, while the latter is more rigorous, slow, and — as accepted by courts — possibly extra-territorial. The Bank filed an application under CPR 81.4, and the court granted a suspended committal order. The Bank then sought to serve the order on Mr Vik in Monaco.
High Court decision
The Judge at first instance, Teare J, carefully considered the multi-faceted arguments. Teare J concluded that permission should not be required to serve the committal order on Mr Vik, because the debtor was already subject to the incidental jurisdiction of the English courts to enforce CPR 71 order. A similar conclusion could be reached by relying on Article 24(5) of the Brussels Recast Regulation (which provides that in proceedings concerned with the enforcement of judgments, the courts of the member state shall have exclusive jurisdiction regardless of the domicile of the parties). However, if the Bank had needed permission to serve the committal order outside the jurisdiction, then his Lordship concluded that the Bank could not rely on the gateway set out in PD 6B 3.1(10) (which provides that a claim may be served out of the jurisdiction with the permission of the court where such claim is made to enforce a judgment or an arbitral award). Both parties appealed against this judgment.
Court of Appeal decision
The Court of Appeal, largely agreeing with Teare J, made five principal findings.
(1) The court found it ironic that Mr Vik argued that CPR 71.8 (specific ground), rather CPR 81.4 (generic ground) applied to the alleged breach of CPR 71.2, since CPR 81.4 offered greater protections to the alleged contemnor. The likely reason for this “counter-intuitive” step was that the latter provision was extra-territorial. The Court of Appeal confirmed that CPR 71.8 is not a mandatory lex specialis for committal applications relating to a breach of CPR 71.2, and that the Bank was perfectly entitled to rely on CPR 81.4.
(2) The Court of Appeal agreed with the findings of Teare J that the court’s power to commit contemnors to prison is derived from its inherent jurisdiction. The CPR rules only provide the technical steps to be followed when this common law power is to be exercised. It followed that it did not make much difference which rule to apply – either the broader CPR 81.4 or the narrower CPR 71.8. Thus, if the Bank had made the committal application under CPR 71.8, the application would have had an extra-territorial effect.
(3) Mr Vik sought to challenge Teare J’s finding that he should be deemed to be within the jurisdiction in the contempt of court proceedings, because they are incidental to the CPR 71.2 order in which he participated. Instead, he argued, such proceedings were distinguishably “new”, and would require permission to serve outside the jurisdiction. The Court of Appeal disagreed and confirmed that the committal order was incidental as the means to enforce the CPR 71.2 order. Therefore, in the light of the strong public interest in the enforcement of English court orders, it was not necessary for the Bank to obtain permission to serve the committal order outside the jurisdiction.
(4) Teare J observed that Article 24(5) of the Brussels Recast Regulation meant that that permission to serve Mr Vik outside of the jurisdiction was not required. Article 24(5) confers exclusive jurisdiction on the courts of the Member State in which the judgment was made and to be enforced by, regardless of the domicile of the parties. The Court of Appeal (in obiter) was generally supportive of this approach, opining that the committal application in the case at hand was likely to fall within Article 24(5) of the Brussels Recast Regulation. However, the careful and subtle wording of Article 24(5) implied that this conclusion might be subject to further consideration on a future occasion.
(5) Under CPR 6.36, a claimant may serve a claim form out of the jurisdiction with the permission of the court where the claim comes within one of the “gateways” contained in PD 6B. The relevant gateway in the Mr Vik’s case was to be found at PD 6B, para 3.1(1), as a claim made to enforce a judgment. Teare J was of the view that the Bank could not rely on this gateway to enforce the committal order. The Court of Appeal was reluctant to give a definitive answer on this point, even though “there may well be considerable force” in the Teare J’s approach. Thus, it remains unclear whether the CPR rules regulating service outside the jurisdiction would apply to the CPR 71 order and the committal order.
The importance of the judgment
This Court of Appeal’s judgment serves as an important reminder for parties who are involved in the enforcement of English judgment debts. Rather than giving a short answer to a narrow point of civil procedure, the judgment contains an extensive analysis of English and EU law. The judgment highlights the tension between important Rule of Law issues such as “enforcing court orders on the one hand” and “keeping within the jurisdictional limits of the Court, especially as individual liberty is at risk, on the other” (Court of Appeal judgment, at para. 1).
The judgment demonstrates the broad extra-territorial reach of the English courts. It also confirms the English court’s creditor-friendly reputation. The findings on the issues of principle may be relevant to applications to serve orders on defendants out of the jurisdiction in other proceedings, for instance worldwide freezing orders or cross-border anti-suit injunctions.
Nevertheless, the judgment demonstrates the need for clear guidance on the jurisdictional getaways to serve out of the jurisdiction for contempt of court. In giving judgment, Lord Justice Gross carefully suggested that the Rules Committee should consider implementing a specific rule permitting such service on an officer of a company, where the fact that he is out of the jurisdiction is no bar to the making of a committal application.
Another issue that seems subject to further clarification is whether a committal order or a provisional CPR 71 order are covered by the Brussels Recast Regulation. A definitive answer to this question becomes particularly intriguing in the light of Brexit.
Legal parentage of children born of a surrogate mother: what about the intended mother?
On October 5th, The Cour de Cassation, the highest court in France for private law matters, requested an advisory opinion of the ECtHR (Ass. plén. 5 octobre 2018, n°10-19053). It is the first time a Contracting State applies to the ECtHR for an advisory opinion on the basis of Protocol n° 16 which entered into force on August 1st, 2018. The request relates to the legal parentage of children born to a surrogate mother. More specifically, it concerns the intended mother’s legal relationship with the child.
The Mennesson case is again under the spotlight, after 18 years of judicial proceedings. Previous developments will be briefly recalled, before the Advisory opinion request is summarized.
Previous developments in the Mennesson case:
A French couple, Mr and Mrs Mennesson, went to California to conclude a surrogacy agreement. Thanks to the surrogate mother, twins were born en 2000. They were conceived with genetic material from the intended father and eggs from a friend of the couple. The Californian Supreme Court issued a judgment referring to the couple as genetic father and legal mother of the children. Birth certificates were issued and the couple asked for their transcription into the French civil status register.
French authorities refused the transcription, arguing that it would be contrary to public policy. Surrogate motherhood, in particular, is forbidden under article 16-7 of the Civil Code. Such agreements are then considered void and resulting foreign birth certificates establishing parentage are considered contrary to public policy (Cass. Civ. 1ère, 6 avril 2011, n°10-19053).
As a last resort, The Mennesson family brought a claim before the ECtHR. They claimed that the refusal to transcribe the birth certificate violated their right to respect for private and family life. While the Court considered that the parent’s right to family life was not infringed, it ruled that the refusal to transcribe the birth certificates violated the children’s right to identity and was not in their best interest. As a consequence, it ruled that the refusal to establish the legal parentage of the indented parents was a violation of the children’s right to private life, particularly so if the indented father was also the biological father.
After the ECtHR ruling: the French landscape
After the ECtHR ruling, the Cour de Cassation softened its position. In 2015, sitting in Assemblée plénière, it ruled that the mere fact that a child was born of a surrogate mother did not in itself justify the refusal to transcribe the birth certificate, as long as that certificate was neither unlawful nor forged, nor did it contain facts that did not correspond to reality (Ass. plén., 3 juillet 2015, n° 14-21323 et n°15-50002).
As a consequence, the Court only accepted the transcription of foreign birth certificate when the intended father is also the biological father. When it came to the other intended parent, the Cour de Cassation refused the transcription. By so doing, the Cour de Cassation reiterates its commitment to the Mater semper certa principle as the sole basis of its conception of motherhood. Meanwhile, in 2017, the Cour de Cassation signalled that the genetic father’s spouse could adopt the child if all the requirements for adoption were met and if it was in the best interest of the child (Cass. Civ. 1ère, 5 juillet, 2017, n°15-28597, n°16-16455, and n°16-16901 ; 16-50025 and the press release)
However, the Mennessons’ fight was not over yet. Although according to the latest decisions, it looked like both Mr and Mrs Mennesson could finally establish their kinship with the twins, they still had to overcome procedural obstacles. As the Cour de Cassation had refused the transcription in its 2011 judgment which had become final, the parents were barred from applying for it again. As pointed out by the ECtHR in the Foulon and Bouvet v. France case (21/07/2016, Application n°9063/14 and 10410/14), French authorities failed to provide an avenue for the parties involved in cases adjudicated before 2014 to have them re-examined in the light of the subsequent changes in the law. Thus, France was again held to be in violation of its obligations under the Convention. (See also Laborie v. France, 19/01/2017, Application n°44024/13).
In 2016, the legislator adopted a new procedure to allow for the review of final decisions in matter of personal status in cases where the ECtHR had ruled that a violation of the ECHR had occurred. The review is possible when it appears that the consequences of the violation of the Convention are serious and that the just satisfaction awarded on the basis of article 41 ECHR cannot put an end to the violation (see articles L.452-1 to L.452-6 of the Code de l’organisation judiciaire).
Current situation:
Taking advantage of this new procedure, the Mennesson family asked for a review of their situation. They claimed that the refusal to transcribe the birth certificates was contrary to the best interest of the children. They also argued that, as it obstructed the establishment of parentage, it amounted to a violation of article 8 ECHR. Moreover, they argued that the refusal to transcribe the birth certificates on the ground that the children were born of a surrogate mother was discriminatory and infringed article 14 ECHR.
Sitting again in Assemblée plénière, the Cour de Cassation summarized its previous case law. It concluded that while the issue of the transcription of the father biological parentage is settled, the answer is less certain regarding the intended mother. The Court wondered if its refusal to transcribe the birth certificate as far as the intended mother is concerned is consistent with the State margin of appreciation under article 8. It also wondered whether it should distinguish between cases where the child is conceived with the genetic material of the intended mother and cases where it is not. Finally, it raised the issue of whether its approach of allowing the intended mother to adopt her husband’s biological child was compatible with article 8 ECHR.
After pointing out the uncertain compatibility of its reasoning with ECtHR case law, the Court chose to request an advisory opinion from the ECtHR. Protocol 16 allows Contracting States to apply to the ECtHR for its advisory opinion “on questions of principles relating to the interpretation or application of the rights and freedom defined in the Convention or the protocols thereto” (Protocol 16 art.1).
Thus, the Cour de Cassation asked the ECtHR the two following questions:
- By refusing to transcribe into civil status registers the birth certificate of a child born abroad from a surrogate mother inasmuch as it refers to the intended mother as the “legal mother”, while the transcription has been accepted when the intended father is the biological father of the child, does a State Party exceed its margin of appreciation under article 8 ECHR? In this respect, is it necessary to distinguish between whether or not the child is conceived with the gametes of the intended mother?
- If the answer to one of the two preceding questions is in the affirmative, does the possibility for the intended mother to adopt her husband’s biological child, which constitutes a mean of establishing parentage open to her, comply with the requirements of article 8 of the Convention?
As the Cour de Cassation indicates on the press release accompanying the request of an advisory opinion, it seized the opportunity of initiating a judicial dialogue between national jurisdictions and the ECtHR. However, it looks more like a sign of caution on the part of the French court, in a particularly sensitive case. Depending on the answer it receives, the Cour de Cassation will adapt its case law.
Although Protocol n°16 does not refer to a specific deadline, the Explanatory report indicates that it would be appropriate for the ECtHR to give high priority to advisory opinion proceedings.
Thus, it looks like the Mennesson saga will be continued soon…
A New Zealand perspective on Israeli judgment against New Zealand-based activists under Israel’s Anti-Boycott Law
Last year the New Zealand singer Lorde cancelled a concert in Tel Aviv following an open letter by two New Zealand-based activists urging her to take a stand on Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine. A few weeks later, the two activists found themselves the subject of a civil claim brought in the Israeli court. The claim was brought by the Israeli law group Shurat HaDin, on behalf of three minors who had bought tickets to the concert, pursuant to Israel’s so-called Anti-Boycott Law (the Law for the Prevention of Damage to the State of Israel through Boycott). The Israeli court has now released a judgment upholding the claim and ordering the activists to pay NZ$18,000 in damages (plus costs).
Readers who are interested in a New Zealand perspective on the decision may wish to visit The Conflict of Laws in New Zealand, where I offer some preliminary thoughts on the conflict of laws issues raised by the judgment. In particular, the post addresses – from a perspective of the New Zealand conflict of laws – the concern that the judgment represents some kind of jurisdictional overreach, before discussing the enforceability of the judgment in New Zealand (and elsewhere).
News
Update: HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention Repository
HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention Repository
In preparation of the Conference on the HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention on 9/10 September 2022, taking place on campus of the University of Bonn, Germany, we are offering here a Repository of contributions to the HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention. Please email us if you miss something in it, we will update immediately…
Update of 20 April 2022: New entries are printed bold.
Please also check the “official” Bibliography of the HCCH for the instrument.
I. Explanatory Reports
| Garcimartín Alférez, Francisco; Saumier, Geneviève |
„Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters: Explanatory Report“, as approved by the HCCH on 22 September 2020 (available here) |
| Garcimartín Alférez, Francisco; Saumier, Geneviève |
“Judgments Convention: Revised Draft Explanatory Report”, HCCH Prel.-Doc. No. 1 of December 2018 (available here) |
| Nygh, Peter; Pocar, Fausto |
“Report of the Special Commission”, HCCH Prel.-Doc. No. 11 of August 2000 (available here), pp 19-128 |
II. Bibliography
| Åkerfeldt, Xerxes | ”Indirekta behörighetsregler och svensk domsrätt – Analys och utredning av svensk domstols behörighet i förhållande till 2019 års Haagkonvention om erkännande och verkställighet” (Examensarbete inom juristprogrammet, avancerad nivå, Örebro Universitet, 2021; available here)
“Indirect jurisdiction and Swedish law – Analysis and inquiry of the jurisdiction of Swedish courts in relation to the 2019 Hague Convention on Recognition and Enforcement” |
| Amurodov, Jahongir | “Some issues of Ratification of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters (2019) by the Republic of Uzbekistan”, Uzbek Law Review 2020-03, pp. 11-116 (available here) |
| Badr, Yehya Ibrahim | “The Hague 2019 Convention for the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judicial Decisions: A Comparative Study”, International Journal of Doctrine, Judiciary, and Legislation (IJDJL) 2 (2021), pp. 427-468 (available here) |
| Balbi, Francesca | “La circolazione delle decisioni a livello globale: il rogetto di convenzione della Conferenza dell’Aia per il riconoscimento e l’esecuzione delle sentenze straniere” (Tesi di dottorato, Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, 2019; available: here) |
| Beaumont, Paul | “Forum non Conveniens and the EU rules on Conflicts of Jurisdiction: A Possible Global Solution”, Revue Critique de Droit International Privé 2018, pp 433-447 |
| Beaumont, Paul R. | “Judgments Convention: Application to Governments”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 121-137 |
| Beaumont, Paul; Holliday, Jane (eds.) |
“A Guide to Global Private International Law”, Oxford 2022, forthcoming. |
| Biresaw, Samuel Maigreg | “Appraisal of the Success of the Instruments of International Commercial Arbitration vs. Litigation and Mediation in the Harmonization of the Rules of Transnational Commercial Dispute Settlement”, preprint (DOI:10.21203/rs.3.rs-953987/v1). |
| Blanquet-Angulo, Alejandra | “Les Zones d’ombre de la Convention de La Haye du 2 Juillet 2019”, Revue Internationale de Droit Comparé (RIDC), 73 (2021), pp. 53-71 |
| Blom, Joost | “The Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act and the Hague Judgments and Jurisdictions Projects”, Osgoode Hall Law Journal 55 (2018), pp 257-304 |
| Bonomi, Andrea | “European Private International Law and Third States”, Praxis des Internationalen Privat- und Verfahrensrechts (IPRax) 2017, pp 184-193 |
| Bonomi, Andrea | “Courage or Caution? – A Critical Overview of the Hague Preliminary Draft on Judgments”, Yearbook of Private International Law 17 (2015/2016), pp 1-31 |
| Bonomi, Andrea; Mariottini, Cristina M. |
“(Breaking) News From The Hague: A Game Changer in International Litigation? – Roadmap to the 2019 Hague Judgments Convention”, Yearbook of Private International Law 20 (2018/2019), pp 537-567 |
| Borges Moschen, Valesca Raizer; Marcelino, Helder |
“Estado Constitutional Cooperativo e a conficaçao do direito internacional privado apontamentos sobre o ’Judgement Project’ da Conferência de Haia de Direito Internacional Privado”, Revista Argumentum 18 (2017), pp 291-319
(Cooperative Constitutional State and the Codification of Private International Law: Notes on the “Judgment Project” of the Hague Conference on Private International Law) |
| Borisov, Vitaly Nikolaevich | “2019 Hague Judgments Convention: Global Recognition and Enforcement of Civil and Commercial Judgments (Review of the International Conference held in Hong Kong on September 9, 2019), Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law 2020-03, pp. 166-172 (available here) |
| Brand, Ronald A. | “The Circulation of Judgments Under the Draft Hague Judgments Convention”, University of Pittsburgh School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series No. 2019-02, pp 1-35 |
| Brand, Ronald A. | “Jurisdictional Developments and the New Hague Judgments Project”, in HCCH (ed.), A Commitment to Private International Law – Essays in honour of Hans van Loon, Cambridge 2013, pp 89-99 |
| Brand, Ronald A. | “New Challenges in Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments”, in Franco Ferrari, Diego P. Fernández Arroyo (eds.), Private International Law – Contemporary Challenges and Continuing Relevance, Cheltenham/Northampton 2019, pp 360-389 |
| Brand, Ronald A. | “Jurisdiction and Judgments Recognition at the Hague Conference: Choices Made, Treaties Completed, and the Path Ahead”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 3-17 |
| Brand, Ronald A. | “The Hague Judgments Convention in the United States: A ‘Game Changer’ or a New Path to the Old Game?“, University of Pittsburgh Law Review 82 (2021), pp. 847-880 (available here) |
| Cai, Ya-qi | “Feasibility Study on China’s Ratification of the HCCH Judgment Convention from the Perspective of Indirect Jurisdiction”, Journal of Taiyuan Normal University (Social Science Edition) 2021-04, pp. 74-80 |
| Çaliskan, Yusuf; Çaliskan, Zeynep |
“2 Temmuz 2019 Tarihli Yabanci Mahkeme Kararlarinin Taninmasi ve Tenfizine Iliskin Lahey Anlasmasinin Degerlendirilmesi”, Public and Private International Law Bulletin 40 (2020), pp 231-245 (available here)
(An Evaluation of 2 July 2019 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters) |
| Cardoso, Connor J. | “Implementing the Hague Judgments Convention”, New York University Law Review 97 (2022), forthcoming (Draft available here) |
| Celis Aguilar, María Mayela | “El convenio de la haya de 30 de junio de 2005 sobre acuerdos de elección de foro y su vinculación con el ‘proyecto sobre Sentencias’ (y viceversa)”, Revista mexicana de Derecho internacional privado y comprado N°40 (octubre de 2018), pp. 29-51 (available here) |
| Chai, Yuhong; Qu, Zichao | “The Development and Future of the Hague Jurisdiction Project”, Wuhan University International Law Review 2021-05, pp. 27-52 (online first) |
| Chen, Wendy | “Indirect Jurisdiction over the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments of Foreign Courts in Compulsory Counterclaims”, Journal of Xingtai University 2019-04, pp. 106-110 |
| Cheng, Xian-ping; Liu, Xian-chao | “On the Application of the Severable Clause in The Hague Judgments Convention”, Harbin Normal University Social Science Journal 2021-05, pp. 30-34 |
| Choi, Sung-Soo | “Review of the several issues of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments”, Gachon Law Review 14 (2021), pp. 37-68 (available here) |
| Clavel, Sandrine ; Jault-Seseke, Fabienne | “La convention de La Haye du 2 juillet 2019 sur la reconnaissance et l’exécution des jugements étrangers en matière civile ou commerciale : Que peut-on en attendre ?”, Travaux du comité français de Droit international privé, Vol. 2018-2020, Paris 2021 (Version provisoire de la communication présentée le 4 octobre 2019, available here) |
| Clover Alcolea, Lucas | “The 2005 Hague Choice of Court and the 2019 Hague Judgments Conventions versus the New York Convention – Rivals, Alternatives or Something Else?”, Mc Gill Journal of Dispute Resolution 6 (2019-2020), pp. 187-214 |
| Coco, Sarah E. | “The Value of a New Judgments Convention for U.S. Litigants”, New York University Law Review 94 (2019), pp 1210-1243 |
| Cong, Junqi | “Reinventing China’s Indirect Jurisdiction over Civil and Commercial Matters concerning Foreign Affairs – Starting from the Hague Judgment Convention” (Master’s Thesis, National 211/985 Project Jilin University; DOI: 10.27162/d.cnki.gjlin.2020.001343) |
| Contreras Vaca, Francisco José | “Comentarios al Convenio de la Haya del 2 de julio de 2019 sobre Reconcimiento y Ejecución de Sentencias Extranjeras en materia civil y comercial”, Revista mexicana de Derecho internacional privado y comprado N°45 (abril de 2021), pp. 110-127 (available here) |
| Cui, Zhenghao | “On the Coordination between the Draft Convention on Judicial Sale of Ships and the related Conventions of the Hague Conference on Private International Law”, China Ship Survey 2021-04, pp. 65-68 |
| Cuniberti, Gilles | “Signalling the Enforceability of the Forum’s Judgments Abroad”, Rivista di diritto internazionale private e processuale (RDIPP) 56 (2020), pp 33-54 |
| DAV (German Bar Association) | “Position Paper on the EU’s possible accession to the Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters of the Hague Conference on Private International Law”, Berlin 2020 (available here) |
| de Araujo, Nadia ; de Nardi, Marcelo ; Spitz, Lidia |
“A nova era dos litígios internacionais”, Valor Economico 2019 |
| de Araujo, Nadia ; de Nardi, Marcelo ; Lopes Inez ; Polido, Fabricio |
„Private International Law Chronicles“, Brazilian Journal of International Law 16 (2019), pp 19-34 |
| de Araujo, Nadia ; de Nardi, Marcelo |
„Consumer Protection Under the HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 67-79 |
| de Araujo, Nadia ; de Nardi, Marcelo |
„22ª Sessão Diplomática da Conferência da Haia e a Convenção sobre sentenças estrangeiras : Primeiras reflexões sobre as vantagens para o Brasil da sua adoção“, Revista de la Secretaría del Tribunal Permanente de Revisión 7 No. 14 (2019), páginas 198-221
(22nd Diplomatic Session of The Hague Conference and the Convention on Foreign Judgments: First Reflections on the Advantages for Brazil of their Adoption) |
| de Araujo, Nadia; De Nardi, Marcelo |
“International Jurisdiction in Civil or Commercial Matters: HCCH’s New Challenge”, in Magdalena Pfeiffer, Jan Brodec, Petr B?íza, Marta Zavadilová (eds.), Liber Amicorum Monika Pauknerová, Prague 2021, pp. 1-11 |
| Dlmoska, Fani | “Would the Judgments Convention lead to unification of the ratification and enforcement of foreign judgments in the SEE Countries: The possible impact of the Judgments Convention”, SEELJ Special Edition No. 8 (2021), pp. 81-103 |
| Dordevic, Slavko | “Country Report Serbia”, in GIZ (ed.), Cross-Border Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judicial Decisions in South East Europe and Perspectives of HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention, Skopje 2021, pp. 180-202 |
| Dotta Salgueiro, Marcos | “Article 14 of the Judgments Convention: The Essential Reaffirmation of the Non-discrimination Principle in a Globalized Twenty-First Century”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 113-120 |
| Douglas, Michael; Keyes, Mary; McKibbin, Sarah; Mortensen, Reid |
“The HCCH Judgments Convention in Australian Law”, Federal Law Review 47 (2019), pp 420-443 |
| Du, Tao | “Frontiers of Private International Law Around the World: An Annual Review (2019-2020)”, Chinese Review of International Law 2021-04, pp. 103-128 (available here) |
| Echegaray de Maussion, Carlos Eduardo | “El Derecho Internacional Privado en el contexto internacional actual : Las reglas de competencia judicial indirecta en el Convenio de la Haya de 2 de Julio de 2019 y el accesso a la justicia” Revista mexicana de Derecho internacional privado y comprado N°45 (abril de 2021), pp. 128-139 (available here) |
| Efeçinar Süral | Possible Ratification of the Hague Convention by Turkey and Its Effects to the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments, Public and Private International Law Bulletin 40 (2020), pp. 775-798 (available here) |
| EGPIL/GEDIP | Observations on the possible accession of the European Union to the Hague Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition of Foreign Judgments, Text adopted on 9 December 2020 following the virtual meeting of 18-19 September 2020 (available here) |
| Ermakova, Elena ; Frovola, Evgenia ; Sitkareva, Elena | “International Economic Integration and the Evolution of the Principles of Civil Procedure”, in Elena G. Popkova, Bruno S. Sergi, Modern Global Economic System, Basel 2021, pp. 1589-1597 |
| European Union (EU)/ European Commission | “Proposal for a Council Decision on the accession by the European Union to the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters”, COM(2021) 388 final (available here) |
| Fan, Jing | “On the Jurisdiction over Intellectual Property in the Draft Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments”, Chinese Yearbook of Private International Law and Comparative Law 2018-02, pp. 313-337 |
| Fan, Jing | “Reconfiguration on Territoriality in Transnational Recognition and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Judgments”, Chinese Review of International Law 2021-01, pp. 90-112 (available here) |
| Farnoux, Étienne | “Reconnaissance et exécution des jugements étrangers en matière civil ou commerciale : À propos de la Convention de La Haye du 2 juillet 2019”, La Semaine Juridique 2019, pp. 1613-1617 |
| Forner Delaygua, Joaquim-Joan | “El Convenio de La Haya de 2 julio 2019 como nuevo marco normativo de las sentencias en materia de contractual comercial”, in Pérez Vera et al. (eds.), El Derecho internacional privado entre la tradición y la innovación – Obra homenaje al Profesor doctor José María Espinar Vicente, Madrid 2020, pp. 307-325 |
| Franzina, Pietro; Leandro, Antonio
|
“La Convenzione dell’Aja del 2 luglio 2019 sul riconoscimento delle sentenze straniere : una prima lettura”, Quaderni di SIDIblog 6 (2019), pp 215-231 (available here)
(The Hague Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition of Foreign Judgments: A First Appraisal) |
| Fuchs, Felix | “Das Haager Übereinkommen vom 2. Juli 2019 über die Anerkennung und Vollstreckung ausländischer Urteile in Zivil- oder Handelssachen“, Gesellschafts- und Wirtschaftsrecht (GWR) 2019, pp 395-399 |
| Garcimartín, Francisco | “The Judgments Convention: Some Open Questions”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 19-31 |
| Garnett, Richard | “The Judgments Project: fulfilling Assers dream of free-flowing judgments”, in Thomas John, Rishi Gulati, Ben Koehler (eds.), The Elgar Companion to the Hague Conference on Private International Law, Cheltenham/Northampton 2020, pp. 309-321 |
| Goddard, David | „The Judgments Convention – The Current State of Play”, Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law 29 (2019), pp 473-490 |
| Gu, Weixia | “A Conflict of Laws Study in Hong Kong-China Judgment Regionalism: Legal Challenges and renewed Momentum”, Cornell International Law Journal 52 (2020), pp. 591-642 |
| Guez, Philippe; de Berard, François; Malet-Deraedt, Fleur; Roccati, Marjolaine; Sinopoli, Laurence; Slim, Hadi; Sotomayor, Marcelo; Train, François-Xavier |
“Chronique de droit international privé appliqué aux affaires, Revue de droit des affaires internationales – 1 décembre 2018 au 31 décembre 2019”, Revue de Droit des Affaires Internationales 2020, pp. 237-274 |
| Gugu Bushati, Aida | “Country Report Albania”, in GIZ (ed.), Cross-Border Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judicial Decisions in South East Europe and Perspectives of HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention, Skopje 2021, pp. 16-41 (available here) |
| Guide, Jia [Foreign Ministry of the People’s Republic of China] |
“Address by the Director of the Department of Treaty and Law of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Jia Guide at the Opening Ceremony of the International Symposium on the Hague Judgment Convention (9 September 2019)”, Chinese Yearbook of International Law 2019, pp. 503-505 |
| Gusson Said, Enza ; Quiroga Obregón, Marcelo Fernando | “Homologação de sentenças estrangeiras e o Judgements
Project”, Derecho y Cambio Social N.º 60 (2020) en línea, |
| Häggblom, Annie | ”2019 a?rs Haagkonvention om erka?nnande och verksta?llighet av utla?ndska domar pa? privatra?ttens omra?de: Ett framga?ngsrikt internationellt instrument pa? den internationella privatra?ttens omra?de?” (Examensarbete i internationell privat- och processrätt, Uppsala Universitet, 2021; available here)
“The Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters : A successful international instrument in the field of private international law?” |
| He, Qisheng | “The HCCH Judgments Convention and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments pertaining to a State”, Global Law Review 3 (2020), pp 147-161 (available here) |
| He, Qisheng | “Unification and Division: Immovable Property Issues under the HCCH Judgement Convention”, Journal of International Law 1 (2020), pp 33-55 |
| He, Qisheng | “The HCCH Judgments Convention and International Judicial Cooperation of Intellectual Property”, Chinese Journal of Law 2021-01, pp. 139-155 |
| He, Qisheng | “Latest Development of the Hague Jurisdiction Project”, Wuhan University International Law Review 2020-04, pp. 1-16 |
| He, Qisheng | “ ’Civil or Commercial Matters’ in International Instruments Scope and Interpretation”, Peking University Law Review 2018-02, pp. 1-25 (available here) |
| He, Qisheng | “A Study on the Intellectual Property Provisions in the ’Hague Convention on Judgment’ – On the Improvement of Transnational Recognition and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Judgments in China”, Journal of Taiyuan University (Social Science Edition) 2020-05, pp. 40-47 |
| He, Qisheng | “Negotiations of the HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention on State Immunity and Its Inspirations”, Chinese Review of International Law 2022-02, pp. 40-52 |
| Herrup, Paul; Brand, Ronald A. |
“A Hague Convention on Parallel Proceedings”, University of Pittsburgh School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series No. 2021-23, pp. 1-10 (available here) |
| Jacobs, Holger | “Der Zwischenstand zum geplanten Haager Anerkennungs- und Vollstreckungsübereinkommen – Der vorläufige Konventionsentwurf 2016“, Zeitschrift für Internationales Privatrecht & Rechtsvergleichung (ZfRV) 2017, pp 24-30 |
| Jacobs, Holger | “Das Haager Anerkennungs- und Vollstreckungsübereinkommen vom 2. Juli 2019 – Eine systematische und rechtsvergleichende Untersuchung“, Tübingen 2021 |
| Jang, Jiyong | “Conditions and Procedure for Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments”, Korea Private International Law Journal 2021-01, pp. 399-430 |
| Jang, Junhyok | “The Public Policy Exception Under the New 2019 HCCH Judgments Convention”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 97-111 |
| Jang, Junhyok | “2019 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters”, Korea Private International Law Journal 2019-02, pp. 437-510. |
| Jang, Junhyok | “Practical Suggestions for Joining the 2019 Judgments Convention and Its Implications for Korean Law and Practice”, Korea Private International Law Journal 2020-02, pp. 141-217 |
| Jovanovic, Marko | Thou Shall (Not) Pass – Grounds for Refusal of Recognition and Enforcement under the 2019 Hague Judgments Convention, YbPIL 21 (2019/2020), pp. 309 – 332 |
| Jueptner, Eva | “The Hague Jurisdiction Project – what options for the Hague Conference?”, Journal of Private International Law 16 (2020), pp 247-274 |
| Jueptner, Eva | “A Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Judgments: why did the Judgments Project (1992-2001) fail?”, (Doctoral Thesis, University of Dundee, 2020) |
| Kasem, Rouzana | “The Future of Choice of Court and Arbitration Agreements under the New York Convention, the Hague Choice of Court Convention, and the Draft Hague Judgments Convention”, Aberdeen Student Law Review 10 (2020), pp. 69-115 |
| Kessedjian, Catherine | “Comment on the Hague Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters. Is the Hague Convention of 2 July 2019 a useful tool for companies who are conducting international activities?“, Nederlands Internationaal Privaatrecht (NIPR) 2020, pp 19-33 |
| Khanderia, Saloni | „The Hague judgments project: assessing its plausible benefits for the development of the Indian private international law”, Commonwealth Law Bulletin 44 (2018), pp 452-475 |
| Khanderia, Saloni | “The Hague Conference on Private International Law’s Proposed Draft Text on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments: Should South Africa Endorse it?”, Journal of African Law 63 (2019), pp 413-433 |
| Khanderia, Saloni | “The prevalence of ‘jurisdiction’ in the recognition and enforcement of foreign civil and commercial judgments in India and South Africa: a comparative analysis”, Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal 2021 |
| Kindler, Peter | “Urteilsfreizügigkeit für derogationswidrige Judikate? – Ein rechtspolitischer Zwischenruf auf dem Hintergrund der 2019 HCCH Judgments Convention“, in Christoph Benicke, Stefan Huber (eds.), Festschrift für Herbert Kronke zum 70. Geburtstag, Bielefeld 2020, pp 241-253 |
| Kostic-Mandic, Maja | “Country Report Montenegro”, in GIZ (ed.), Cross-Border Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judicial Decisions in South East Europe and Perspectives of HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention, Skopje 2021, pp. 114-137 (available here) |
| Krotkov, I. A.; Sidorova, A.P. |
“On the Concept of the possible Ratification by the Russian Federation of the Convention of July 2019”, in Perm State University (ed.), First All-Russian Conference of Young Scientists on Actual Issues of the Development in Private Law and Civil Procedure (Perm 12 December 2020), Perm 2020, pp. 140- 142 (available here) |
| Landbrecht, Johannes | “Commercial Arbitration in the Era of the Singapore Convention and the Hague Court Conventions”, ASA Bulletin 37 (2019), pp. 871-882 (available here) |
| Lee, Gyooho | “The Preparatory Works for the Hague Judgment Convention of 2019 and its Subsequent Developments in terms of Intellectual Property Rights”, Korea Private International Law Journal 2020-02, pp. 85-140 |
| Liu, Guiqiang | “Limitation Period for the Enforcement of Foreign Judgments”, China Journal of Applied Jurisprudence 2020-04, pp. 109-124 |
| Liu, Yang; Xiang, Zaisheng | “The No Review of Merit Clause in the Hague Judgments Convention”, Wuhan University International Law Review 2020-05, pp. 44-65 |
| Malachta, Radovan | “Mutual Trust between the Member States of the European Union and the United Kingdom after Brexit: Overview”, in Ji?í Valdhans (ed.), COFOLA International 2020: Brexit and its Consequences – Conference Proceedings, Brno 2020, pp. 39-67 (available here) |
| Malatesta, Alberto | “Circolazione delle sentenze tra Unione europea e Regno Unito: a favore di una cooperazione in seno alla Conferenza dell’Aja”, Rivista di diritto internazionale private e processuale (RDIPP) 57 (2021), pp. 878-898 |
| Mariottini, Cristina | „Establishment of Treaty Relations under The 2019 Hague Judgments Convention“, YbPIL 21 (2019/2020), pp. 365-380 |
| Mariottini, Cristina | “The Exclusion of Defamation and Privacy from the Scope of the Hague Draft Convention on Judgments, YbPIL 19 (2017/2018), pp 475-486. |
| Martiny, Dieter | “The Recognition and Enforcement of Court Decisions Between the EU and Third States”, in Alexander Trunk, Nikitas Hatzimihail (eds.), EU Civil Procedure Law and Third Countries – Which Way Forward?, Baden-Baden 2021, pp 127-146 |
| Maude, L. Hunter | “Codifying Comity: The Case for U.S. Ratification of the 2019 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters”, Wisconsin International Law Review 38 (2021), pp. 108-138 |
| Meier, Niklaus | “Notification as a Ground for Refusal”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 81-95 |
| Muir Watt, Horatia | “Le droit international privé au service de la géopolitique : les enjeux de la nouvelle Convention de la Haye du 2 juillet 2019 sur la reconnaissance et l’exécution des jugements étrangers en matière civile ou commerciale”, Revue Critique de Droit International Privé 2020, pp. 427-448 |
| Nielsen, Peter Arnt | “The Hague 2019 Judgments Convention – from failure to success”, Journal of Private International Law 16 (2020), pp 205-246 |
| Nielsen, Peter Arnt | “A Global Framework for International Commercial Litigation”, in Christoph Benicke, Stefan Huber (eds.), Festschrift für Herbert Kronke zum 70. Geburtstag, Bielefeld 2020, pp 415-433 |
| Nishimura, Yuko | “Indirect Jurisdiction at the Place where the Immovable Property is situated in HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention”, Seinan Gakuin University Graduate School Research Review N°13, pp. 1-20 (available here) |
| North, Cara | “The 2019 HCCH Judgments Convention: A Common Law Perspective”, Praxis des Internationalen Privat- und Verfahrensrechts (IPRax) 2020, pp 202-210 |
| North, Cara | “The Exclusion of Privacy Matters from the Judgments Convention”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 33-48 |
| Oestreicher, Yoav | “ ’We’re on a Road to Nowhere’ – Reasons for the Continuing Failure to Regulate Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments”, The International Lawyer 42 (2008), pp 59-86 |
| Öhlund, Jonas | ”2019 års Haagkonvention – ett globalt regelverk om erkännande och verkställighet av domar”, Svensk Juristtidning 2020, pp. 350-360 (available here) |
| Okorley, Solomon | “The possible impact of the Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters on Private International Law in Common Law West Africa”, (Master’s Dissertation, University of Johannesburg, 2019; available: here) |
| Pasquot Polido, Fabrício B. | “The Judgments Project of the Hague Conference on Private International Law: a way forward for a long-awaited solution”, in Verónica Ruiz Abou-Nigm, Maria Blanca Noodt Taquela (eds.), Diversity and integration in Private International Law, Edinburgh 2019, pp. 176-199 |
| Payan, Guillaume | “Convention de La Haye du 2 juillet 2019 sur la reconnaissance et l’exécution des jugements étrangers en matière civile ou commerciale”, in Hubert Alcarez, Olivier Lecucq (eds.), L’exécution des décisions de justice, Pau 2020, pp 167-183 |
| Pertegás Sender, Marta | “The 2019 Hague Judgments Convention: Its Conclusion and the road ahead”, in Asian Academy of International Law (publ.), Sinergy and Security: the Keys to Sustainable Global Investment: Proceedings of the 2019 Colloquium on International Law, 2019 Hong Kong, pp 181-190 (available here) |
| Pertegás, Marta | “Brussels I Recast and the Hague Judgments Project”, in Geert Van Calster (ed.), European Private International Law at 50: Celebrating and Contemplating the 1968 Brussels Convention and its Successors, Cambridge 2018, pp 67-82 |
| Pocar, Fausto | “Riflessioni sulla recente convenzione dell’Aja sul riconoscimento e l’esecuzione delle sentenze straniere”, Rivista di diritto internazionale privato e processuale 57 (2021), pp. 5-29 |
| Pocar, Fausto | “Brief Remarks on the Relationship between the Hague Judgments and Choice of Court Conventions”, in in Magdalena Pfeiffer, Jan Brodec, Petr B?íza, Marta Zavadilová (eds.), Liber Amicorum Monika Pauknerová, Prague 2021, pp. 345-353 |
| Poesen, Michiel | “Is specific jurisdiction dead and did we murder it? An appraisal of the Brussels Ia Regulation in the globalizing context of the HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention”, Uniform Law Review 26 (2021), pp. 1-13 |
| Popov, Vasiliy | “Grounds for Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Russia”, Issues of Russian Justice 15 (2021), pp. 137-152 |
| Povlakic, Meliha | “Country Report Bosnia and Herzegovina”, in GIZ (ed.), Cross-Border Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judicial Decisions in South East Europe and Perspectives of HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention, Skopje 2021, pp. 42-81 (available here) |
| Qerimi, Donikë | “Country Report Kosovo”, in GIZ (ed.), Cross-Border Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judicial Decisions in South East Europe and Perspectives of HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention, Skopje 2021, pp. 82-113 (available here) |
| Qian, Zhenqiu | “On the Common Courts Provision under the Draft Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments”, Wuhan University International Law Review 2019-01, pp. 59-74 (available here) |
| Qian, Zhenqiu; Yang, Yu |
“On the Interpretation and Application of the Cost of Proceedings Provision under the Hague Judgment Convention”, China Journal of Applied Jurisprudence 2020-04, pp. 96-108 |
| Reisman, Diana A. A. | “Breaking Bad: Fail –Safes to the Hague Judgments Convention”, Georgetown Law Journal 109 (2021), pp. 880-906 |
| Revolidis, Ioannis | « From the ashes we will rise – recognition and enforcement of international judgments after the revival of the Hague Convention », Lex & Forum 4/2021 |
| Reyes, Anselmo | „Implications of the 2019 Hague Convention on the Enforcement of Judgments of the Singapore International Commercial Court”, in Rolf A. Schütze, Thomas R. Klötzel, Martin Gebauer (eds.), Festschrift für Roderich C. Thümmel zum 65. Geburtstag, Berlin 2020, pp 695-709 |
| Ribeiro-Bidaoui, João | “The International Obligation of the Uniform and Autonomous Interpretation of Private Law Conventions: Consequences for Domestic Courts and International Organisations”, Netherlands International Law Review 67 (2020), pp 139 – 168 |
| Rumenov, Ilija | “Implications of the New 2019 Hague Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments on the National Legal Systems of Countries in South Eastern Europe”, EU and Comparative Law Issues and Challenges Series (ECLIC) 3 (2019), pp 385-404 |
| Rumenov, Ilija | “Country Report North Macedonia”, in GIZ (ed.), Cross-Border Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judicial Decisions in South East Europe and Perspectives of HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention, Skopje 2021, pp. 138-179 (available here) |
| Rumenov, Ilija | “The indirect jurisdiction of the 2019 Hague Convention on recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in civil or commercial matters – Is the “heart” of the Convention”, SEELJ Special Edition No. 8 (2021), pp. 9-45 |
| Sachs, Klaus; Weiler, Marcus |
“A comparison of the recognition and enforcement of foreign decisions under the 1958 New York Convention and the 2019 Hague Judgments Convention”, in Rolf A. Schütze, Thomas R. Klötzel, Martin Gebauer (eds.), Festschrift für Roderich C. Thümmel zum 65. Geburtstag, Berlin 2020, pp 763-781 |
| Saito, Akira | “Advancing Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments: Developments of Inter-Court Diplomacy and New Hague Judgments Convention”, Kobe Law Journal 2019-03, pp. 59-110 (available here) |
| Salim, Rhonson | “Quo Vadis Consumer Dispute Resolution? – UK & EU Cross Border Consumer Dispute Resolution in the Post Brexit Landscape”, Revista Ítalo-Española De Derecho Procesal 2022-01, forthcoming (E-pub ahead available here) |
| Sánchez Fernández, Sara | “El Convenio de la Haya de Reconocimiento y Ejecución de Sentencias”, Revista Española de Derecho Internacional 73 (2021), pp. 233-252 |
| Saumier, Geneviève | “Submission as a Jurisdictional Basis and the HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 49-65 |
| Schack, Haimo | “Wiedergänger der Haager Konferenz für IPR: Neue Perspektiven eines weltweiten Anerkennungs- und Vollstreckungsübereinkommens?“, Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht (ZeuP) 2014, pp 824-842 |
| Schack, Haimo | „Das neue Haager Anerkennungs- und Vollstreckungsübereinkommen“, Praxis des Internationalen Privat- und Verfahrensrechts (IPRax) 2020, pp 1-96 |
| Senicheva, Marina | “The Relevance and Problems of the Hague Convention of July 2, 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Ratification by the Russian Federation”, Advances in Law Studies 8 (2020), online (available: here) |
| Shan, Juan | “A study on the Anti-trust Provisions in the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters”, Chinese Yearbook of Private International Law and Comparative Law 2019-01, pp. 318-335 |
| Shchukin, Andrey Igorevich | “Indirect International Jurisdiction in the Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments of 2019 (Part 1)”, Journal of Russian Law No. 2020-07, pp. 170-186 (available here) |
| Shchukin, Andrey Igorevich | “Indirect International Jurisdiction in the Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments of 2019 (Part 2)”, Journal of Russian Law No. 2020-11, pp. 140-54 (available here) |
| Shen, Juan | “Further Discussion on the Drafts of the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters and Considerations from Chinese Perspective”, Chinese Review of International Law 2016-06, pp. 83-103 (available here) |
| Silberman, Linda | “Comparative Jurisdiction in the International Context: Will the Proposed Hague Judgments Convention be Stalled?”, DePaul Law Review 52 (2002), pp 319-349 |
| Silberman, Linda | “The 2019 Judgments Convention: The Need for Comprehensive Federal Implementing Legislation and a Look Back at the ALI Proposed Federal Statute”, NYU School of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 21-19 (available here) |
| Skvortsova, Tatyana Aleksandrovna; Denyak, Victoria Yurievna |
“On the issue of Recognition and Enforcement of Court Decisions of a Foreign State in the Russian Federation”, Collection of selected Articles of the International Scientific Conference, Saint Petersburg (2021), pp. 258-261 |
| Solomon, Dennis | “Das Haager Anerkennungs- und Vollstreckungsübereinkommen von 2019 und die internationale Anerkennungszuständigkeit“, in Rolf A. Schütze, Thomas R. Klötzel, Martin Gebauer (eds.), Festschrift für Roderich C. Thümmel zum 65. Geburtstag, Berlin 2020, pp 873-893 |
| Song, Jianli | “ ‘Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Civil and Commercial Judgments’ and its influence on my country”, People’s Judicature (Application) 2020-01, pp. 88-92 (available here) |
| Song, Lianbin; Chen, Xi | “The Judicial Difference and International Coordination of the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Punitive Damages Judgements: Also on China’s Corresponding Measures Under the Frame of HCCH Convention”, Jiang-Huai Tribune 2021-03, pp. 111-113 |
| Spitz, Lidia | „Homologação De Decisões Estrangeiras No Brasil – A Convenção de Sentenças da Conferência da Haia de 2019 e o contrôle indireto da jurisdição estrangeira”, Belo Horizonte 2021 |
| Spitz, Lidia | „Refusal of Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments on Public Policy Grounds in the Hague Judgments Convention – A Comparison with The 1958 New York Convention“, YbPIL 21 (2019/2020), pp 333-364 |
| Stein, Andreas | „Das Haager Anerkennungs- und Vollstreckungsübereinkommen 2019 – Was lange währt, wird endlich gut?“, Praxis des Internationalen Privat- und Verfahrensrechts (IPRax) 2020, pp 197-202 |
| Stewart, David P. | „Current Developments: The Hague Conference adopts a New Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters”, American Journal of International Law (AJIL) 113 (2019), pp 772-783 |
| Stitz, Olivia | “Comity, Tipping Points, and Commercial Significance: What to expect of the Hague Judgments Convention”, Corporate and Business Law Journal (Corp. & Bus. L.J.) 2 (2021), pp. 203-236 (available here) |
| Storskrubb, Eva | “The EU Commission’s Proposal for the EU to Accede to the Hague Judgments Convention”, EU Law Live Weekend Edition No. 75 (2021), pp. 10-16 (available here) |
| Suk, Kwang-Hyun | “Principal Content and Indirect Jurisdiction Rules of the Hague Judgments Convention of 2019”, Korea Private International Law Journal 2020-02, pp. 3-83 |
| Sun, Jin; Wu, Qiong |
“The Hague Judgments Convention and how we negotiated it”, Chinese Journal of International Law 19 (2020) (available here) |
| Sun, Xiaofei; Wu, Qiong |
“Commentary and Outlook on the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters”, Journal of International Law 2019-01, pp. 155-164+170 |
| Symeonides, Symeon C. | “Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments: The Hague Convention of 2019”, in Symeon C. Symeonides, Cross-Border Infringement of Personality Rights via the Internet, Leiden 2021, pp. 130-144 |
| Symeonides, Symeon C. | « The Hague Treaty for the Recognition of Foreign Decisions-The Lowest Common Denominator », Lex & Forum 4/2021 |
| Takeshita, Keisuke | “The New Hague Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments: Analysis on its Relationship with Arbitration”, Japanese Commercial Arbitration Journal (JCA) 2020-02, pp. 10-15 (available here) |
| Takeshita, Keisuke | “The New Hague Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments”, Japanese Commercial Arbitration Journal
Part 1: JCA 2020-04, pp. 40-45 (available here) Part 2: JCA 2020-05, pp. 40-45 (available here) Part 3: JCA 2020-06, pp. 42-49 (available here) Part 4: JCA 2020-10, pp. 40-46 (available here) Part 5: JCA 2020-11, pp. 35-41 (available here) Part 6: JCA 2020-12, pp. 43-48 (available here) Part 7: JCA 2021-02, pp. 50-56 (available here) Part 8: JCA 2021-04, pp. 45-51 (available here) Part 9: JCA 2021-07, pp. 46-53 Part 10: JCA 2021-09, pp. 40-46 Part 11: JCA 2021-10, pp. 48-54 Part 12: JCA 2022-01, pp. 45-52 Part 13: JCA 2022-03, pp. 44-51 |
| Taquela, María Blanca Noodt ; Abou-Nigm, Verónica Ruiz | “News From The Hague: The Draft Judgments Convention and Its Relationship with Other International Instruments”, Yearbook of Private International Law 19 (2017/2018), pp 449-474 |
| Teitz, Louise Ellen | “Another Hague Judgments Convention? – Bucking the Past to Provide for the Future”, Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law 29 (2019), pp 491-511 |
| Tian, Hongjun | “The Present and Future of the Recognition and Enforcement of Civil and Commercial Judgments in Northeast Asia: From the Perspective of the 2019 Hague Judgments Convention”, Chinese Yearbook of Private International Law and Comparative Law 2019-01, pp. 300-317 |
| Tian, Xinyue; Qian, Zhenqiu; Wang, Shengzhe |
“The Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments (Draft) and China’s Countermeasure – A Summary on the Fourth Judicial Forum of Great Powers”, Chinese Yearbook of Private International Law and Comparative Law 2018-01, pp. 377-388 |
| Trooboff, Peter D.; North, Cara; Nishitani, Yuko; Sastry, Shubha; Chanda, Riccarda |
“The Promise and Prospects of the 2019 Hague Convention: Introductory Remarks”, Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting 114 (2020), pp. 345-357 |
| Tsang, King Fung; Wong, Tsz Wai |
“Enforcement of Non-Monetary Judgments in Common Law Jurisdictions: Is the Time Ripe?”, Fordham International Law Journal 45 (2021), pp. 379-428 (available here) |
| van der Grinten, Paulien; ten Kate, Noura |
„Editorial: The 2019 Hague Judgments Convention”, Nederlands Internationaal Privaatrecht (NIPR) 2020, pp 1-3 |
| van Loon, Hans | “Towards a global Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters”, Nederlands Internationaal Privaatrecht (NIPR) 2020, pp 4-18 |
| van Loon, Hans | “Towards a Global Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters”, Collection of Papers of the Faculty of Law, Niš 82 (2019), pp 15-35 |
| van Loon, Hans | “Le Brexit et les conventions de La Haye”, Revue critique de droit international privé (Rev. Crit. DIP) 2019, pp. 353-365 |
| Viegas Liquidato, Vera Lúcia | “Reconhecimento E Homologação De Sentenças Estrangeiras : O Projeto De Convenção Da Conferência da Haia”, Revista de Direito Brasileira 2019-09, pp. 242-256 |
| Wagner, Rolf | “Ein neuer Anlauf zu einem Haager Anerkennungs- und Vollstreckungsübereinkommen“, Praxis des Internationalen Privat- und Verfahrensrechts (IPRax) 2016, pp 97-102 |
| Wang, Quian | “On Intellectual Property Right Provisions in the Draft Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments”, China Legal Science 2018-01, pp. 118-142 (available here) |
| Wang, Yahan | “No Review of the Merits in Recognizing and Enforcing Foreign Judgments”, China Journal of Applied Jurisprudence 2020-04, pp. 78-95 |
| Weidong, Zhu | “The Recognition and Enforcement of Commercial Judgments Between China and South Africa: Comparison and Convergence”, China Legal Science 2019-06, pp 33-57 (available here) |
| Weller, Matthias | “The HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention: New Trends in Trust Management?”, in Christoph Benicke, Stefan Huber (eds.), Festschrift für Herbert Kronke zum 70. Geburtstag, Bielefeld 2020, pp 621-632 |
| Weller, Matthias | “The 2019 Hague Judgments Convention – The Jurisdictional Filters of the HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention”, Yearbook of Private International Law 21 (2019/2020), pp 279-308 |
| Weller, Matthias | “Das Haager Übereinkommen zur Anerkennung und Vollstreckung ausländischer Urteile”, in Thomas Rauscher (ed.), Europäisches Zivilprozess- und Kollisionsrecht, Munich, 5th ed., forthcoming |
| Weller, Matthias | „Die Kontrolle der internationalen Zuständigkeit im Haager Anerkennungs- und Vollstreckungsübereinkommen 2019“, in Christoph Althammer/Christoph Schärtl (eds.), Festschrift für Herbert Roth, Tübingen 2021, pp. 835-855 |
| Wilderspin, Michael; Vysoka, Lenka |
“The 2019 Hague Judgments Convention through European lenses”, Nederlands Internationaal Privaatrecht (NIPR) 2020, pp 34-49 |
| Wu, Qiong | “The Overview of the 22nd Diplomatic Session of the Hague Conference on Private International Law”, Chinese Yearbook of International Law 2019, pp. 337-338 |
| Xie, Yili | “Research on the Intellectual Property Infringment System of the Hague Judgments Convention”, China-Arab States Science and Technology Forum 2021-09, pp. 190-194 |
| Xu, Guojian | “Comment on Key Issues Concerning Hague Judgment Convention in 2019 “, Journal of Shanghai University of Political Science and Law 35 (2020), pp 1-29 |
| Xu, Guojian | “To Establish an International Legal System for Global Circulation of Court Judgments”, Wuhan University International Law Review 2017-05, pp 100-130 |
| Xu, Guojian | “Overview of the Mechanism of Recognition and Enforcement of Judgements Established by HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention”, China Journal of Applied Jurisprudence No. 2020-02, pp 65-77 |
| Xu, Guojian | “On the Scope and Limitation of the Global Circulation of Court Judgments: An Analysis on the Application Scope of the 2019 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters”, Chinese Yearbook of Private International Law and Comparative Law 2019-01, pp. 269-299 |
| Yang, Yujie | “On the Rules of indirect Jurisdiction responding to Litigation – Based on Article 5, Paragraph 1, Item 6 of the Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters” (Master Thesis China Foreign Affairs University Beijing 2021) |
| Yekini, Abubakri
|
“The Hague Judgments Convention and Commonwealth Model Law – A Pragmatic Perspective”, Oxford 2021. |
| Yeo, Terence | “The Hague Judgments Convention – A View from Singapore”, Singapore Academy of Law Journal (e-First) 3rd August 2020 (available here) |
| Yuzhakov, D.A. | “Legal Regulation of the Procedures for Enforcement of Decisions of Foreign Courts in Economic Disputes”, Urgent Issues of the Entrepreneurship Law, Civil Litigation and Arbitration (Perm State University) No. 4 (2021), pp. 119-123 (available here) |
| Zasemkova, Olesya Fedorovna | “ ‘Judicial Convention’ as a New Stage in the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments”, Lex Russica 2019-10, pp. 84-103 (available here) |
| Zasemkova, Olesya Fedorovna | “Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in the Context of the Adoption of the « Judicial Convention » 2019”, in Zhuikov V.M., Shchukin A.I. (eds.), Liber Amicorum Natalia Ivanovna Marysheva, pp. 196-211 |
| Zernikow, Marcel | “Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Decisions in MERCOSUR Letters Rogatory (Carta Rogatória) and National Civil Procedure” Yearbook of Private International Law 22 (2020/2021), pp. 353-380 |
| Zhang, Chunliang; Huang, Shan |
“On the Common Courts Rules in Hague Judgments Convention – China’s way for the Judicial Assistance under Belt and Road Initiative”, Journal of Henan University of Economics and Law 2020-05, pp. 103-113 |
| Zhang, Lizhen | “On the Defamation Problem in the Hague Judgments Project: Ever In and Now out of the Scope”, Wuhan University International Law Review 2019-01, pp. 41-58 (available here) |
| Zhang, Wenliang | “The Finality Requirement of Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments”, Wuhan University Law Review 2020-02, pp. 19-38 |
| Zhang, Wenliang; Tu, Guangjian | “The Hague Judgments Convention and Mainland China-Hong Kong SAR Judgments Arrangement: Comparison and Prospects for Implementation”, Chinese Journal of International Law 20 (2021), pp. 101-135 |
| Zhang, Wenliang; Tu, Guangjian |
“The 1971 and 2019 Hague Judgments Conventions: Compared and Whether China Would Change Its Attitude Towards The Hague”, Journal of International Dispute Settlement (JIDS), 2020, 00, pp. 1-24 |
| Zhang, Zhengyi; Zhang, Zhen |
“Development of the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters and Its Implication to China”, International and Comparative Law Review 2020, pp. 112-131 |
| Zhao, Ning | “The HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention, adding essential components for an effective international legal framework on recognition and enforcement”, in UIHJ (ed.), David Walker (dir.), Cyberjustice, de nouvelles opportunités pour l’huissier de justice / Cyberjustice, New Opportunities for the Judicial Officer – XXIVe Congrès de l’Union Internationale des Huissiers de Justice – Dubai – 22 au 25 Novembre 2021, Bruxelles 2021, pp. 120-133 |
| Zhao, Ning | “Completing a long-awaited puzzle in the landscape of cross-border recognition and enforcement of judgments: An overview of the HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention”, Swiss Review of International and European Law (SRIEL) 30 (2020), pp 345-368 |
| Zirat, Gennadii | “Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters: A new Contribution of the Hague Conference on Private International Law to the Unification of International Civil Procedure”, Ukrainian Journal of International Law 2020-03, pp. 105-112 (available here) |
III. Recordings of Events Related to the HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention
| ASADIP; HCCH | “Conferencia Internacional: Convención HCCH 2019 sobre Reconocimiento y Ejecución de Sentencias Extranjeras”, 3 December 2020 (full recording available here and here) |
| ASIL | “The Promise and Prospects of the 2019 Hague Convention”, 25-26 June 2020 (full recording available here and here) |
| Department of Justice Hong Kong; HCCH | “Inaugural Global Conference – 2019 HCCH Judgments Convention: Global Enforcement of Civil and Commercial Judgments”, 9 September 2019 (recording available here) |
| HCCH | “HCCH a|Bridged: Innovation in Transnational Litigation – Edition 2021: Enabling Party Autonomy with the HCCH 2005 Choice of Court Convention”, 1 December 2021 (full recording available here) |
| HCCH | “22nd Diplomatic Session of the HCCH: The Adoption of the 2019 Judgments Convention”, 2 July 2020 (short documentary video available here) |
| JPRI; HCCH; UNIDROIT; UNCITRAL | “2020 Judicial Policy Research Institute International Conference – International Commercial Litigation: Recent Developments and Future Challenges, Session 3: Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments”, 12 November 2020 (recording available here) |
| UIHJ; HCCH | “3rd training webinar on the Hague Conventions on service of documents (1965) and recognition and enforcement of judgements (2019)”, 15/18 March 2021 (full recording available here in French and here in English) |
| University of Bonn; HCCH | “Pre-Conference Video Roundtable on the HCCH 2019 Judgments Convention: Prospects for Judicial Cooperation in Civil and Commercial Matters between the EU and Third Countries”, 29 October 2020 (full recording available here) |
| Lex & Forum Journal; Sakkoula Publications SA | « The Hague Conference on Private International Law and the European Union – Latest developments », 3 December 2021 (full recording available here) |
BIICL Event on ‘Reframing Jurisdiction: Revising the Grounds or a New Scheme?’
The British Institute of International and Comparative Law (BIICL) is hosting an event on ‘Reframing Jurisdiction: Revising the Grounds or a New Scheme?’ on 11 May 2022.
The event, which is convened by Eva Lein (BIICL / Lausanne), will feature two panels. In the first panel, Richard Fentiman (Cambridge) and Alistair Mackenzie (2TG) will consider proposals presently before the Civil Procedure Rules Committee to make changes to the existing jurisdictional gateways. In the second panel, Adrian Briggs and Andrew Dickinson (both Oxford) will present their own ideas for reform, on which Dame Elizabeth Gloster (One Essex Court) will comment. The panels will be chaired by Marie Louise Kinsler (2TG / Cambridge) and Alexander Layton (20 Essex / KCL).
More information can be found here.
CJEU on ex officio examination of jurisdiction under the Succession Regulation, case VA and ZA, C-645/20
Where the habitual residence of the deceased at the time of death is not located in a Member State – or, more precisely – not located in a Member States bound by the Succession Regulation, the court of a Member State which finds that the deceased had the nationality of that State and held assets within its territory must, of its own motion, examine whether it has jurisdiction under Article 10(1)(a) of the Succession Regulation? This is the question that the Court of Justice addresses in its judgment of 7 April 2022, handed down in the case VA and ZA, C-645/20.
Upcoming Events
Short Notes
Nothing Found
Sorry, no posts matched your criteria