Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T23:07:38.156Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Negotiation of Convention on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Judgments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2017

Sean D. Murphy
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 95 , Issue 2 , April 2001 , pp. 418 - 421
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Hague Conference on Private International Law, Preliminary Draft Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (October 1999), at <http://www.hcch.net/e/workprog/jdgm.html> [hereinafter Preliminary Draft Convention].

2 [Editor’s Note: Brussels Convention on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, Sept. 27, 1968, as amended, 1990 O.J. (C 189) 1 (harmonizing rules of jurisdiction and procedures for recognition and enforcement of judgments among EU member states); Lugano Convention on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, Sept. 16, 1988, 1988 O.J. (L 319) 9 (harmonizing such rules and procedures among EU member states and European Free Trade Area states). In December 2000, the European Commission adopted a regulation that amends the terms of the Brussels Convention and essentially transforms it into a European Communities legal instrument that is binding and directly applicable to the EU member states participating in the adoption of the regulation. See Council Regulation 44/2001 of December 2000 on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, 1997 O.J. (L 12) 1, available at <http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/>.]

3 [Editor’s Note: The Uniform Foreign Money Judgments Recognition Act, 13 U.L.A. 263 (1986 & 2000 Supp.), was developed in 1962 by the American Bar Association and the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws.]

4 [Editor’s Note: Convention on the Service of Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters, Nov. 15,1965, 20 UST 361, 658 UNTS 163; Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters, Mar. 18,1970, 23 UST 2555, 847 UNTS 231; Convention Abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public Documents, with annex, Oct. 5, 1961 33 UST 883, 527 UNTS 189; Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Oct. 25, 1980, TIAS 11670, 1343 UNTS 98.]

5 Jeffrey D. Kovar, Assistant Legal Adviser, U.S. Dep’t of State, Prepared Statement for Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Courts and Intellectual Property of the House Comm. on the Judiciary, 106th Cong., at 4-9 (July 29, 2000) (on file at GWU).

6 Preliminary Draft Convention, supra note 1, Art. 18.

7 For a discussion of this human rights exception, see Beth Van, Schaack, In Defense of Civil Redress: The Domestic Enforcement of Human Rights Norms in the Context of the Proposed Hague Judgments Convention, 42 Harv. Int’l L. J. 141 (2001).Google Scholar

8 Letter from Jeffrey, D. Kovar, Assistant Legal Adviser, U.S. Dep’t of State, to Alasdair Wallace, Head of International and Common Law Services Division, U.K. Lord Chancellor’s Dep’t (Sept. 10, 2000)Google Scholar (on file at GWU).