A Study on the Trend in Hague Conference on Private International Law regarding Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Civil Protection Orders

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 501-587
Author(s):  
Byung Hwa Lee
10.12737/4826 ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (7) ◽  
pp. 76-81
Author(s):  
Наталия Доронина ◽  
Nataliya Doronina ◽  
Наталия Марышева ◽  
Nataliya Maryshyeva

The Agenda of the Hague Conference on Private International Law includes working group discussion of a problem of recognition and enforcement of foreign civil protection orders. Civil protection orders is a legal instrument which is usually used in domestic violence cases. Domestic violence may take different forms of harmful interpersonal behavior. The authors analyze foreign legislation in this sphere of relations, compares it with the Russian legislation and come to the conclusion that it is necessary to broaden the international legal assistance in this sphere. For this purpose the Russian legislation may be accomplished with the institute of civil protection orders, which is now absent in the Civil Process Code. From that point of view the participation of the Russian Federation in the Hague Conference on Private International Law working group seems to be useful both for international relations and Russian legislation because the problem of protection against domestic violence is now being discussed by the Russian specialists in criminal law.


Author(s):  
Jin Sun ◽  
Qiong WU

Abstract In July 2019, the Hague Conference on Private International Law adopted the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters. As an outcome of the Judgments Project, this Convention will exert a great influence on the global circulation of foreign judgments. China attached great importance to the Judgments Project and participated in the full negotiation process. This paper is a reflection of some of the Chinese negotiators’ approaches in handling certain very difficult but important issues in the process, with the hope that it may shed some light on China’s negotiation practice and the principles it adheres to in the international law arena, which are fully in line with the principles of equity and justice, mutual benefit, and win-win outcome.


Lex Russica ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 84-103
Author(s):  
O. F. Zasemkova

In May 2018, at the 4th and final meeting of the Special Commission of the Hague Conference on Private International Law, the draft Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters that had been developed since 1992 was represented. It is expected that after the Diplomatic Session that will be held in the mid-2019 the draft will be finalized and the Convention will be adopted and opened for signature.In this regard, the article attempts to analyze the main provisions of the draft Convention and assess the appropriateness for the Russian Federation to access it, taking into account the fact that Russia has a limited number of international treaties permitting recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in Russia and decisions of Russian courts abroad. Based on the results of the analysis, the author concludes that the adoption of this Convention will provide for a simple and effective basis for the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments eligible for States with different legal, social and economic circumstances. This, in turn, will increase the practical value of court decisions ensuring the most comprehensive protection of the rights and interests of the party in whose favour the decision has been made and, as a consequence, will contribute to the attractiveness of this method of dispute resolution for parties involved in cross-border private law relations.However, the mixed attitudes of the EU and the USA to the Draft Convention raises the question of their accession to the future Convention and may significantly reduce the impact of the adoption of the document under consideration.


Author(s):  
Zinian Zhang

AbstractThis study empirically investigates China’s participation in the globalized cross-border insolvency collaboration system. It is the first time for the development of China’s cross-border insolvency law to be examined against the background of private international law on foreign judgment recognition and enforcement. The findings of this article reveal that foreign bankruptcy representatives face considerable difficulties in satisfying the treaty and reciprocity requirements when seeking judicial assistance from China, and that local protectionism in favour of China’s state-owned and state-linked companies undermines foreign bankruptcy representatives’ confidence in approaching China’s courts for support. Although there are several court recognitions of foreign bankruptcy judgments in China, this article finds that they are only used to acknowledge the legal status of foreign bankruptcy representatives to meet the demands of government authorities; Chinese courts have not taken a substantial step in recognizing a foreign bankruptcy judgment so as to bar individual creditors’ action in the interest of a foreign bankruptcy proceeding. On the contrary, for Chinese bankruptcy representatives seeking assistance abroad, they could take advantage of the liberal judicial infrastructure, especially of some advanced jurisdictions, to obtain recognition and relief.


Author(s):  
Julia Hörnle

Chapter 8 examines the harmonized provisions on private international law in the EU. It discusses the conflict of law rules in civil and commercial matters contained in the Brussels Regulation on Jurisdiction and the Rome I Regulation (applicable law contracts) and Rome II Regulation (non-contractual obligations). It analyses their scope of application and the general and special rules of jurisdiction for contract and torts, and the law applicable to different types of contracts and non-contractual liability. It provides a general overview of the main aspects of private international law in the EU and how this applies in internet cases.


2001 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 373-412
Author(s):  
Peter Stone

The entry into force on 1st March 2001 of Regulation 1347/2000 on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Matrimonial Matters and in Matters of Parental Responsibility for Children of Both Spouses (‘the Matrimonial Regulation’) amounts to a landmark in the harmonisation of private international law at European Community level. It deals with direct judicial jurisdiction, and the mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments, but not choice of law, in respect of divorce, separation and annulment of marriage, and of custody (in a broad sense) of children of both spouses when determined on the occasion of matrimonial proceedings. It is the first EC measure to enter into force dealing with private international law in family matters, and is likely to be followed up by further such measures, especially in relation to child custody when dealt with independently of any matrimonial proceedings.


2014 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 197-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Kenny

AbstractThe common law rules for recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments were radically reformulated by the Canadian Supreme Court in Beals v Saldanha. Few other common law jurisdictions have considered whether or not to follow Canada in this development in private International Law. In 2012, the Irish Supreme Court definitively rejected the Canadian approach. This note examines the judgment in that case, and assesses the reasoning of the Irish Court.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document