Plus ça Change? Article 5(1) of the Regulation on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments

2000 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 383-406
Author(s):  
Pippa Rogerson
Keyword(s):  
European Community ◽  
Brussels Convention ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
Article 5

In October 2000 the Commission of the European Community presented an amended proposal of the Council’s new Regulation on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters. This Regulation proposes considerable changes to the Brussels Convention. Article 5(1) has been one of the most frequently used and often litigated provisions of the Brussels Convention. Academic criticism of it in England has occasionally been forceful. Article 5(1) has not escaped the reforming zeal of the Commission and it is interesting to reflect on the new Regulation.

Plus ça Change? Article 5(1) of the Regulation on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments

2000 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 383-406
Author(s):  
Pippa Rogerson
Keyword(s):  
European Community ◽  
Brussels Convention ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
Article 5

In October 2000 the Commission of the European Community presented an amended proposal of the Council’s new Regulation on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters. This Regulation proposes considerable changes to the Brussels Convention. Article 5(1) has been one of the most frequently used and often litigated provisions of the Brussels Convention. Academic criticism of it in England has occasionally been forceful. Article 5(1) has not escaped the reforming zeal of the Commission and it is interesting to reflect on the new Regulation.

II. External Competence Implications of the Ec Regulation on Jurisdiction and Judgments

2003 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 529-534 ◽  
Author(s):  
Koji Takahashi
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Community ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
Brussels Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
Council Regulation

Council Regulation 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of Judgments in Civil Commercial Matters1 replaced the 1968 Brussels Convention on 1 March 2002 for Member States of the European union Except Denmark.2 This has given the European Community exclusive competence in matters relating to jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments. As a result individual Member States can no longer freely ratify conventions which, in relation to specific matters, govern jurisdiction or the recognition or enforcement of judgments.3 This is reflected in the deletion of ‘or will be’ from the text of Article 71(1) of the Regulation,4 a phrase which previously found in the equivalent provision in the Brussels Convention.5

The Developing EC Private International Law on Family Matters

2001 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 373-412
Author(s):  
Peter Stone
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
European Community ◽  
Child Custody ◽  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
Broad Sense ◽  
Community Level ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Parental Responsibility ◽  
Choice Of Law ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement

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.

Part III Jurisdiction, Foreign Judgments and Awards, 17 Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments Under the Brussels/Lugano System

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Torremans Paul
Keyword(s):  
Brussels Convention ◽  
System P ◽  
Small Claims ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement

This chapter discusses the recognition and enforcement of judgments under the Brussels/Lugano system. It first considers the rules on recognition and enforcement under the Brussels I Recast, including grounds and non-grounds for refusal of recognition and enforcement. It then examines recognition and enforcement under the EC/Denmark Agreement and the Brussels Convention, the circumstances that merit the application of the rules on recognition and enforcement under the Lugano Convention, and the differences between the Lugano Convention and the Brussels I Recast with respect to recognition and enforcement of judgments. It also reviews the relevant provisions of the European Enforcement Order Regulation, the European Order for Payment Procedure Regulation, and the European Small Claims Procedure Regulation.

Service of Process in England on Overseas Companies and Article 5(5) of the Brussels Convention

1999 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 921-936 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nelson E. Enonchong
Keyword(s):  
Great Britain ◽  
Common Law ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Brussels Convention ◽  
English Court ◽  
Natural Person ◽  
The Law ◽  
Special Rules ◽  
Article 5 ◽  
A Company

It is generally accepted that, in actions in personam, the foundation of the court's jurisdiction at common law is the service of process.1 To this extent the rules as to service define the limits of the court's jurisdiction. So, for a claimant to establish the jurisdiction of the English court over an overseas company2 he must be able to serve process on the company in accordance with the rules of service. The general rule is that an overseas company, like an individual, may be served with process in England if present within the jurisdiction.3 However, since a company is only a legal (not natural) person, it cannot be present in the same way as an individual. It has therefore been necessary for special rules to be laid down by which it can be determined whether or not an overseas company is present in England and therefore may be served with process here. Before 1992 those rules were contained in sections 691 and 695 of the Companies Act 19854 (the pre-1992 regime). However, in 1992 the law was amended and a separate provision was laid down in section 694A of the Companies Act 1985 to regulate the service of process on any overseas company with a branch in Great Britain (the 1992 regime).

BOOK REVIEWSBOOK REVIEWSvan der WeideJ. A.Lecturer in private international law, Faculty of Law, Free University, Amsterdam122001483367371RutgersJ.W., International Reservation of Title Clauses: A Study of Dutch, French and German Private International Law in the Light of European Law, T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague 1999, XI + 233 pp., € 61.50/US$ 81/UK£ 47.25. ISBN 90-6704-116-5.Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 20012001T.M.C. Asser PresspdfS0165070X00001388a.pdfdispartBook Reviews1.See, e.g., VlietL.P.W. van, Transfer of Movables in German, French, English and Dutch Law (diss. Maastricht) (Nijmegen, Ars Aequi Libri 2000).2.1968 Brussels Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, most recently amended by the 1996 Accession Convention. The Brussels Convention will be converted into the Council Regulation (EC) No. 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (Official Journal ECL 12, 16 01 2001), which will come into force on 1 March 2002. This Council Regulation shall apply to all EC Member States except Denmark.3.Directive 2000/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 June 2000 (Official Journal EC L 200, 8 08 2000). Art. 4 states: ‘1) Member States shall provide in conformity with the applicable national provisions designated by private international law that the seller retains title to goods until they are fully paid for if a retention of title clause has been expressly agreed between the buyer and the seller before the delivery of the goods. 2) Member States may adopt or retain provisions dealing with down payments already made by the debtor.’4.See, e.g., MünchKomm-Kreuzer, Internatonales sachenrecht (München, C.H. Beck 1998), Nach Art. 38 Anh. I, nrs. 66–67; Staudinger/Stoll, Internationales Sachenrecht (Berlin, Sellier de Gruyter 1996) nrs. 282–285 and 292–294; WeberR.H., ‘Parteiautonomie im internationalen Sachenrecht?

2001 ◽  
Vol 48 (03) ◽  
pp. 367
Author(s):  
J. A. van der Weide
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Official Journal ◽  
Brussels Convention ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
European Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Law Faculty ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Hague ◽  
Council Regulation
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document