The Hague Judgments Convention, completed on July 2, 2019, is built on a list of “jurisdictional filters” in Article 5(1), and grounds for non-recognition in Article 7. If one of the thirteen jurisdictional tests in Article 5(1) is satisfied, the judgment may circulate under the Convention, subject to the grounds for non-recognition found in Article 7. This approach to Convention structure is especially significant for countries considering ratification and implementation. A different structure was suggested in the initial Working Group stage of the Convention’s preparation which would have avoided the complexity of multiple rules of indirect jurisdiction, each of which comes with its own complexity and risk for non-uniform interpretation. That alternative structure, however, may in fact be possible under the current Convention text, using Article 15 as a work-around. Article 15 allows the recognition or enforcement of judgments under national law. For countries like the United States, with very liberal existing law on the recognition of foreign judgments, Article 15 may in fact provide a more efficient, effective, and economical approach, even under the Convention. This article considers the benefits and risks of the complex Convention structure which was chosen, as well as the alternative Convention architecture that was left behind in the negotiation process. It then suggests that the path through Article 15 may well offer a valuable alternative in the implementation and operation of the Convention in countries with existing liberal and non-discriminatory approaches to judgments recognition.
Ronald A. Brand,
The Hague Judgments Convention in the United States: A “Game Changer” or a New Path to the Old Game?,
University of Pittsburgh Law Review, Forthcoming
Available at: https://scholarship.law.pitt.edu/fac_articles/346
Civil Procedure Commons, Commercial Law Commons, Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Conflict of Laws Commons, Contracts Commons, Courts Commons, Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Commons, International Law Commons, International Trade Law Commons, Jurisdiction Commons, Law and Economics Commons, Litigation Commons, Transnational Law Commons