Brief overview: Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments ("Hague Convention")

LEGAL+ NEWS

Brief overview: Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments

The Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (“Hague Convention”) came into force throughout the EU on September 1, 2023.

Overview HAZÜ

Ukraine ratified the Convention in August 2022. As a result of this ratification and the previous accession of the European Union, the required number of member states was reached and the convention was able to enter into force one year later.

In the EU area (with the exception of Denmark), the Hague Convention will in future supplement the EU Brussels I Regulation, the Lugano Convention and the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements.

In addition to the EU and Ukraine, five other countries (Costa Rica, Israel, Russia, the USA and Uruguay) have signed the Hague Convention but have not yet ratified it. Its practical significance is therefore still limited to the relationship with Ukraine, as the EU GDPR in particular has priority among the EU member states.

The Hague Convention provides that judgments of a contracting state that are valid and enforceable there are to be recognized and enforced in the other contracting states. The prerequisite is that the foreign court bases its international jurisdiction on a ground specified in Art. 5 Hague Convention.

Art. 7 para. 1 Hague Convention defines six situations in which recognition and enforcement can be refused. These are the following cases, which are also included in the EU GDPR:

Poor delivery
Fraudulently obtaining the judgment title
Violation of the odre public
Breach of jurisdiction agreement
Conflicting judgment in the requested State
Conflicting earlier decision

Conclusion on the HAZÜ

For the time being, the Hague Convention has no significance within Europe due to the primacy of the EU GDPR. Beyond the borders of the EU, the RAPTA is primarily aimed at the USA, which is an extremely important economic partner but has not yet ratified the RAPTA. Accordingly, the Hague Convention is of very limited significance for the time being. Please also read my detailed article on the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in Germany.

Do you have any questions?

LATEST ARTICLES

Nicht kategorisiert

Up to €10,000 before the local court: why it goes wrong

Up to €10,000 in the local court – a mistake with an announcement. The planned reform of the amount in dispute will shift masses of proceedings from the regional courts to the local courts. Sounds like a relief – but will have the opposite effect.

Contract law: Stuttgart 21 and the speech clause – a lesson in clear contract drafting

Sometimes a single sentence decides billions. This is exactly what happened with the Stuttgart 21 project. At the center of the legal dispute was a short contractual provision – the so-called “speech clause”.

Breach of an international jurisdiction agreement can result in liability for damages! – On the ruling of the BGH from 17.10.2019 (Ref. III ZR 42/19)

International agreements on jurisdiction, especially if they are to have exclusive validity, generally have the purpose of protecting the party benefiting from the agreement from the often very considerable costs of a legal dispute in a foreign country.

Unfortunately, however, it is not uncommon for the other contracting party to suddenly no longer want to know about the jurisdiction agreement in the event of a dispute. The background to such a dishonest approach is – obviously – not least the potential for blackmail associated with such an approach. This is because the party that finds itself – in breach of the jurisdiction agreement – exposed to a foreign lawsuit is regularly forced to take action abroad through lawyers in order to avoid legal disadvantages. This in turn is often very expensive, with the USA being the most prominent example.