INTRODUCTION

The recognition and local enforcement of foreign judgments by a court of the state of enforcement at the request of a party has become the prototype mechanism for “importing” foreign judgments. Alternative methods seem to have largely lost their significance, at least outside the common law world. Such alternative methods are enforcement at the request of a foreign court and an action upon the foreign judgment that leads to the creation of a new domestic judgment. The recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments does not imply cooperation at the enforcement level. The judgment creditor must initiate enforcement proceedings in every jurisdiction whose authorities need to take action to enforce the judgment. Instruments providing for the free movement of judgments only remove the requirement of obtaining a new title for enforcement in each jurisdiction whose enforcement authorities the judgment creditor wishes to engage.

The recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments can either operate ipso iure or require a separate procedure, i.e., delibation with respect to recognition and/or exequatur with respect to enforceability. Where it operates ipso iure, it is generally up to every court or other authority for whose decision the foreign judgment is relevant to assess whether the prerequisites for recognition and enforcement are met. From the perspective of the party relying on the foreign judgment, the optimal solution is if a separate procedure in which a court issues a binding decision on whether the judgment can be recognized and enforced in the state addressed is available but not mandatory.

Regardless of the procedural framework, rules on the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments generally require that the judgment fulfils certain prerequisites. In addition, they provide for grounds for refusal. The consequences of the distinction between prerequisites and grounds for refusal may vary and are not always completely clear.

This report’s main focus is on public policy and its function in the rules on the recognition and enforcement of judgments and arbitral awards in civil and commercial matters. It discusses whether this function is or should be different within the framework of regional instruments as opposed to the global level. Enforcement can be difficult and cumbersome if the judgment debtor’s assets are widely dispersed – even more so if the judgment creditor does not know the location of such assets.