scholarly journals A convenção de haia sobre a cobrança internacional de alimentos em benefício dos filhos e de outros membros da família: a recente recepção pelo ordenamento jurídico brasileiro

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 76-96
Author(s):  
Luciane Klein Vieira ◽  
Taísa Nara de Oliveira Barbosa
Keyword(s):  
International Cooperation ◽  
Child Support ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Efficient Communication ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Hague Convention ◽  
Weak Party

O presente artigo tem como foco a cobrança internacional de alimentos, sua natureza e seus procedimentos, tendo em vista a recente ratificação da Convenção de Haia sobre a Cobrança Internacional de Alimentos em Benefício dos Filhos e de outros Membros da Família, pelo Brasil, em 2017. Neste sentido, busca estudar, em matéria de alimentos, o processo de reconhecimento e de execução de decisões estrangeiras a que estão submetidos os países signatários da referida Convenção, preocupando-se menos com um olhar individual e específico sobre como as sentenças transnacionais são reconhecidas e executadas no Brasil e mais com uma visão ampla sobre os principais aspectos da Convenção sobre as obrigações alimentares. O principal objetivo é demonstrar como a cooperação internacional, através das autoridades centrais, permite uma comunicação mais rápida e eficaz entre os Estados partes, beneficiando, deste modo, ao alimentando, objeto da tutela pretendida Abstract This article analyzes the international recovery of alimony, its nature and its procedures, in view of the Hague Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance, ratified by Brazil in 2017. The article seeks to study, in the matter of alimony, the process of recognition and enforcement of foreign decisions to which the signatory countries of the Convention are subject. This seeks less an individual and specific look at how transnational sentences are recognized and enforced in Brazil and a broader view on the main aspects of the Convention on maintenance obligations. The main focus is on the objective of demonstrating how international cooperation between the states, through the central authorities, which allows for a faster and more efficient communication between the States Parties, thus benefiting the weak party, the object of the intended protection.

scholarly journals 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

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 31-35
Author(s):  
Marina Senicheva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Hague Convention

The article sheds some light on problems that impede the ratification by the Russian Federation of the Hague Convention on the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgements of July 2, 2019. As a result of analysis of the risks and prospects of ratification by the Russian Federation of the Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign judgements of July 2, 2019, the author concludes that there are no legal contradictions that could adversely affect ratification of the convention in question. In this regard it is possible to conclude that these are political contradictions and the Russian Federation’s reluctance to build a cross-border system for recognizing and enforcing decisions of foreign courts that can impede the convention's ratification

Part III Recognition and Enforcement, 20 Hague

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hartley Trevor C
Keyword(s):  
Hague Convention ◽  
Article 9 ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Hague Convention ◽  
General Conditions

This chapter considers recognition and enforcement under the Hague Convention. Hague applies only to judgments given by a court of a State to which the Hague Convention applies, and it applies only if the court of origin had jurisdiction under a choice-of-court agreement. The position under Hague is different from that under Brussels 2012 and Lugano 2007 since the court addressed is not precluded from deciding for itself whether the choice-of-court agreement was valid and the claim was within its scope. Apart from this, Hague has a great deal in common with Brussels and Lugano, though there are a number of additional provisions in the former that find no counterpart in the latter. The relevant provisions are found in Part III of the Convention. Article 8 lays down the general conditions for recognition; Article 9 provides certain specific grounds for non-recognition and subsequent Articles deal with special issues. Each of these provisions are considered in turn.

Between National Interests and Global Business: China’s Possible Reservations to the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 295-318
Author(s):  
Wei Cai ◽  
Jonathan Kolieb
Keyword(s):  
Positive Impact ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Pragmatic Approach ◽  
Global Business ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Chinese Law ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
Pros And Cons ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Hague Convention

Abstract In September 2017, China signed the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements. There are no obstacles preventing China from ratifying the Convention. However, the possible reservations China may declare appear to be a key concern for the success of the Convention. This article identifies the key conflicts between the Convention and Chinese law and practice, and analyses the pros and cons of some possible reservations the Chinese authorities may consider when ratifying the Convention. China’s ratification of the Convention would have a positive impact on the global recognition and enforcement of foreign civil and commercial judgments. Although China may have some specific concerns (e.g. national security) in its recognition and enforcement of particular foreign judgments, it is desirable that China adopts a pragmatic approach and minimize the number and extent of its reservations to the Convention.

I. The 20th Session Of The Hague Conference: A New Choice Of Court Convention And The Issue Of Ec Memebership

2006 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 447-456 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thalia Kruger
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Arbitration Clause ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Hague ◽  
New York Convention ◽  
20Th Session ◽  
The Hague Convention

On 30 June 2005 a Convention to respect choice of court agreements was finally born. The Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements aspires to be parallel to the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958) (‘New York Convention’). The exception is that if an equally broadly accepted convention exists with respect to choice of court agreements,1 business parties will have an alternative to choosing arbitration in their contracts. If they have the assurance that a judgement will be recognized and enforced in a large number of States, some might be more inclined to insert a choice of court clause instead of an arbitration clause. This assumption has been confirmed by ICC research.2

Part 2 National and Regional Reports, Part 2.4 Europe: Coordinated by Thomas Kadner Graziano, 48 Switzerland: Swiss Perspectives on the Hague Principles

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graziano Thomas Kadner ◽  
Meyle Hannes
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Hague Convention ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Foreign Law ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Hague Convention

This chapter describes Swiss perspectives on the Hague Principles. Switzerland is a Contracting State to the Hague Convention of 15 June 1955 on the Law Applicable to International Sale of Goods. For contracts other than commercial sales, the applicable law is determined by the Swiss Federal Act on Private International Law (PILA). It covers jurisdiction, international civil procedure, applicable law, and the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. The Swiss PILA therefore constitutes an all-inclusive, comprehensive codification of private international law. For many issues, the rules contained with the PILA are already in conformity with those in the Hague Principles. Where the Hague Principles cover issues that have not yet been explicitly addressed by the PILA, such as choice of non-State rules in Article 3 of the Hague Principles, or conflicting choice of law clauses in standard forms in Article 6(1)(b) of the Hague Principles, the legislator may very well take the Hague Principles into consideration when amending the PILA. In fact, the Swiss legislator regularly takes inspiration from international and foreign law when amending the law or covering new issues.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document