The fifth meeting of the Working Group charged with preparing the Hague Judgments Convention

Copiado de: <http://conflictoflaws.net/>. Acesso em: 23 nov. 2015.

The report of the fifth meeting of the Working Group established by the Council on General Affairs and Policy of the Hague Conference on Private International Law to prepare proposals in connection with “a future instrument relating to recognition and enforcement of judgments, including jurisdictional filters” is now available through the Conference’s website (see here for an account of the previous meeting).

The Working Group proceeded on the basis that the Convention should: (a) be a complementary convention to the Hague Choice of Court Convention of 30 June 2005, currently in force for the EU and Mexico; (b) provide for recognition and enforcement of judgments from other contracting States that meet the requirements set out in a list of bases for recognition and enforcement; (c) set out the only grounds on which recognition and enforcement of such judgments may be refused; and (d) not prevent recognition and enforcement of judgments in a contracting State under national law or under other treaties, subject to one provision relating to exclusive bases for recognition and enforcement (covering matters in the fields of intellectual property rights and immovable property).

The proposed draft text of the Convention prepared by the Working Group is annexed to the report.

The Working Group recommended to the Council on General Affairs and Policy (which is expected to meet in March 2016) that the proposed draft text be submitted for consideration to a Special Commission “to be held, if possible, in June 2016″.

It also recommended that matters relating to direct jurisdiction (including exorbitant grounds and lis pendens) be considered by the Experts’ Group in charge of the Judgments Project “with a view to preparing an additional instrument”. In the Working Group’s view, the Experts’ Group “should meet soon after the Special Commission has drawn up a draft Convention”.

Article: Quelques réflexions sur l'ordre public en droit international privé (Some Remarks on the Public Policy in Private International Law)

Alexey Bilyachenko 

Université de La Rochelle

April 23, 2014

Abstract:

French Abstract: Ensemble avec l’exception de fraude, l’exception d’ordre public constitue l’un des piliers de la reconnaissance des jugements et autres actes publics étrangers. L’importance du sujet s’accroît ces dernières années avec le contentieux concernant la gestation pour autrui et avec la réflexion doctrinale sur la reconnaissance unilatérale des situations juridiques en droit international privé. Pourtant la notion même de l'ordre public n'a pas de définition précise en droit et dans la doctrine français. Cette indétermination de la notion de l’ordre public a deux conséquences négatives. Premièrement, elle entraîne parfois des incohérences dans l’application de l’exception du même nom, notamment en ce qui concerne l’ordre public de proximité ou d’éloignement et les clauses spéciales d’ordre public. Deuxièmement, son indétermination brouille la frontière entre cette notion et celle des lois de police. Et surtout, l’indétermination de l’ordre public est une source d’insécurité juridique. 

English Abstract: The public policy defense, including due process defense, is one of the most important points of the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments and other foreign public acts. The importance of the subject matter in Europe grows these last years with the surrogacy litigation and with the scholar researches on the recognition of legal situations in private international law. Though the very concept of the ordre public has no precise definition in french law nor in jurisprudence. Such indetermination of the concept of ordre public has two negative consequences. First, it may lead to the incoherence in the application of the exception of ordre public, namely sometimes in case of the "ordre public de proximité" or so called "special ordre public clauses". Second, its indetermination makes uncertain the frontier between this concept and the concept of overriding mandatory provisions. And after all, the indetermination of the ordre public creates legal uncertainty.

Note: Downloadable document is in French.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 22

Disponível em: <http://ssrn.com/abstract=2428662>. Acesso em 25 maio 2014.

Article: Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Canada

Antonin I. Pribetic 

Himelfarb Proszanski 

January 15, 2014

Ontario Bar Association Institute 2014, 'Internationalizing Commercial Contracts' 

Abstract:

This paper provides an overview of the governing conflict of laws principles for the recognition or enforcement of foreign judgments, including an analysis of the recent Court of Appeal for Ontario decision in Yaiguaje et al. v. Chevron Corporation et al. and its implications for the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments, generally. The issue of state immunity as an obstacle to foreign judgment enforcement is also considered.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 47

Disponível em: <http://ssrn.com/abstract=2379721>. Acesso em 20 fev. 2014.