Jump to Content Jump to Main Navigation

Part III Recognition and Enforcement, 19 Brussels and Lugano: Authentic Instruments and Court Settlements

From: Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments in Europe: The Brussels I Regulation, the Lugano Convention, and the Hague Choice of Court Convention

Trevor C Hartley

From: Oxford Legal Research Library (http://olrl.ouplaw.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All Rights Reserved.date: 30 October 2020

Substance and procedure — Consent in private international law — Recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments – Brussels and Lugano Conventions — Substance and Procedure

This chapter deals with the enforcement of two special kinds of legal instruments: authentic instruments and court settlements. Both are contracts and derive their validity from the consent of the parties. They normally acknowledge the indebtedness of one party to the other. Court settlements are usually concluded to put an end to a dispute. The special feature of both instruments is the way in which they are concluded, and it is this which gives them a special status in the country of origin, often equivalent to <i>res judicata</i>. What is striking about the provisions on these instruments in Brussels and Lugano is that the enforcement of an authentic instrument or court settlement originating in one Member State (Lugano State) is virtually automatic in other Member States (Lugano States): public policy is stated to be the only ground on which it may be contested.

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.