The Public Policy Exception Under the New 2019 HCCH Judgments Convention
Tóm tắt
The public policy exception is inherently a fluid device. Its content is basically left to each State. A shared public policy is an exception. Therefore, the obligation of uniform interpretation, as provided in Article 20 of the 2019 Judgments Convention, will have an inherent limit here. Moreover, the Convention leaves some important issues, including procedure, to national rules. Each requested State retains a discretion to invoke the Convention grounds of refusal in a concrete case, and on whether to make an ex officio inquiry or have the parties prove those refusal grounds. The Convention also provides for the concrete applications of the public policy exception, following the model of the 2005 Choice of Court Convention. Here, a purely grammatical reading may create some peripheral problems, especially with the specific defences of conflicting judgments and parallel proceedings. Solutions may be found in the method of purposive interpretation and some general principles, particularly the evasion of the law and the abuse of rights, before resorting to the public policy defence.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Brand R, Herrup P (2008) The 2005 Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements—commentary and documents. Cambridge University Press, New York
Garcimartín F, Saumier G (2018) Judgments Convention: revised draft preliminary report. In: Prel Doc No 1 for the twenty-second session of the Hague conference on private international law, The Hague. https://assets.hcch.net/docs/7d2ae3f7-e8c6-4ef3-807c-15f112aa483d.pdf. Accessed 21 Feb 2020
Hartley T, Dogauchi M (2007) Explanatory report on the 2005 Hague Choice of Court Agreements Convention. In: Permanent Bureau of the Conference (2010) Proceedings of the twentieth session (2005), Tome III, Choice of Court. Intersentia, Antwerp/Oxford/Portland, pp 784–863. https://assets.hcch.net/upload/expl37final.pdf. Accessed 21 Feb 2020
Kegel G, Schurig K (2004) Internationales Privatrecht, 9th edn. C.H. Beck, Munich
Lee H-C (1981) Kukje sabŏb [Private international law]. Kyŏngmunsa, Seoul
Nakano S (2012) Gaikoku hanketsu no shōnin sikkō [Recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments]. In: Honma Y et al (eds) Kokusai minji tetsuzukihō [International civil procedure], 2nd edn. Yuhigaku, Tokyo, pp 175–200
North C (2018) The possible exclusion of anti-trust matters from the Convention as reflected in Article 2(1)(p) of the 2018 draft Convention. In: Prel Doc No 2 for the twenty-second session of the Hague Conference on Private International Law, The Hague
Pocar F (2009) Explanatory report [on the] Convention on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, signed in Lugano on 30 October 2007. Official Journal 23.12.2009, C 310/1
Schack H (2018) Internationales Zivilverfahrensrecht, 7th edn. C.H. Beck, Munich
Suk K (2007) Kukje sangsa jungjebŏb yŏn’gu [Essays in international commercial arbitration law], vol I. Pakyoungsa, Seoul
Suk K (2012) Kukje minsa sosongbŏb [International civil procedure law]. Pakyoungsa, Seoul
Von Mehren AT (1980) Recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments—general theory and the role of jurisdictional requirements. Recueil des cours 167:9–112