Exequatur

Siendo una política generalizada internacionalmente la descolmatación de los órganos jurisdiccionales, delegándose ciertas funciones a otras entidades o funcionarios púbicos, como es el caso del divorcio por mutuo acuerdo, el cual, en muchos países, al igual que en Perú, se puede tramitar ante Notarios Púbicos o Municipalidades, para su reconocimiento en nuestro país resulta plenamente aplicable el Proceso de Exequatur. del mismo modo que para las sentencias o laudos extranjeros.

The financial crisis has increased claims on grounds of false or mistaken information given to investors in order to capture capital. Many of them are brought before the United States’ jurisdiction seeking for the advantages provided by the securities class actions, which allow to decide in an only proceeding claims involving multiple investors, including the ones resident in other countries. Economic procedural reasons are pushing other States, like Germany or the Netherlands, to introduce some kind of collective remedy as well. This paper aims at presenting how these procedural mechanisms work as well as at addressing the situation of collective justice for investors in Spain, at the moment just restricted to the investor characterized as consumer. Besides, the already depicted internationalization of markets demands to tackle traditional issues of Private international law, i.e. the criteria on international
jurisdiction to interpose a collective action in investment matters, the applicable law to such matters and recognition and enforcement of decisions, maybe the most pressing issue taking into account possible foreign claims against Spanish companies or in which Spanish investors are included. Eventually, this paper closes with the interest of evolving in Spain a collective action comprehending all kind of investors,
an issue which could be finally decided by an European instrument, on which the European Commission is actively working

Resumen: En el presente Auto la Audiencia Provincial de Gipuzkoa otorga el exequatur a una Sentencia de divorcio dictada por el Tribunal Jaafarita Religioso de Saida del Líbano con la excepción de determinados convenios considerados contrarios al orden público. Palabras clave: exequatur, Ley de Cooperación Jurídica Internacional, divorcio, orden público, reconocimiento parcial. Abstract: This paper analyzes the Act of the Spanish Court of Appel of Gipuzkoa about the recognition and enforcement of the Judgment of Court Jaafarita of Saida (Libano) about a marriage dissolution.

Creditors in international business transactions need to follow a three-step plan in order to secure the satisfaction of their claims: Secure an enforceable judgment in their jurisdiction; declare the latter enforceable in the country of the judgment debtor; and proceed swiftly or at least timely to execution measures. Practice shows that the problems are usually appearing in steps 1 or 2. A recent ruling of the Greek Supreme Court demonstrates that potential pitfalls are to be expected even beyond.

Exequatur de una sentencia de Conaky República de Guinea, en la que los padres renuncian a la patria potestad de su hija menor, con objeto de que, al reconocerla en España, sus tíos, que viven en España, ejerzan la tutela respecto a la niña que vive en Barcelona. En primera instancia, se deniega porque se estima contraria al  ordenamiento jurídico español, que no reconoce la posibilidad de renunciar, por parte de los progenitores, a su patria potestad. Por su parte, la Audiencia provincial de Barcelona estima parcialmente el recurso y considera que debe reconocerse, por no considerarla con-traria al orden público español. Tanto en primera instancia, como en apelación, no se reconoce la tutela, pero si la guardia con funciones tutelares a los tíos de la menor que viven en España.

Exequatur of a sentence of Conaky Republic of Guinea, where the parents renounce the parental authority of their daughter, so that, when it is recognized in Spain, her uncles, who live in Spain, exercise the guardianship over the girl who lives in Barcelona. In first instance, it is denied because it is considered contrary to the Spanish legal system that does not recognize the possibility of renouncing, on the part of the parents, their parental authority. For its part, the Provincial Court of Barcelona partially upheld the appeal and considers that it should be recognized as not being contrary to Spanish public order. Both in the first instance and in the appeal, the guardianship is not granted, but is recognized the guard with guardianship functions to the uncles of the minor who live in Spain.

The article reviews the framework for recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Brazil, including: (i) a brief historical overview of the article's subject-matter; (ii) a review of the formal and procedural requirements for recognition and enforcement of foreign awards in Brazil; (iii) an analysis of the problems with the notion of public policy, as applied in exequatur applications; and (iv) a look at some recent developments in case law relating to applications for exequatur of foreign arbitral awards in Brazil.

AUTOR: VICENTE CARRILLO VENEZIAN

RESUMEN: La tradición arbitral chilena ha sido una pieza fundamental en la resolución alternativa de conflictos, lo cual se ha reflejado aún más en materia comercial internacional. En efecto, Chile ha adoptado una serie de convenios internacionales que tienden a facilitar el reconocimiento y posterior ejecución de laudos en otras jurisdicciones. Esto se refleja con mayor claridad con la dictación de la Ley 19.971 sobre Arbitraje Comercial Internacional. No obstante, la práctica jurisprudencial ha sido seguir aplicando anticuadas normas del Código de Procedimiento Civil, en circunstancias en que es posible, a partir de la normativa vigente, plantear un reconocimiento automático de laudos para ser ejecutados conforme a las reglas generales, prescindiendo así del trámite denominado Exequátur.

PALABRAS CLAVE: Ejecución - Laudo Arbitral - Procedimiento de Exequátur - Arbitraje Comercial Internacional.

The current proxy voting system in the United States has become the subject of considerable controversy. Because institutional investment managers have the authority to vote their clients’ proxies, they have a fiduciary obligation to those clients. Frequently, in an attempt to fulfill that obligation, these institutional investors employ proxy advisory services to manage the thousands of votes they must cast. However, many proxy advisory services have conflicts of interest that inhibit their utility to those seeking to discharge their fiduciary duties. In this article, we describe the current proxy advisory network as an example of how current notions of conflicts of interest fall short when explaining the behavior of an intercon- nected set of market players whose remit is to act in the best interests of their investors. We discuss what participants in this system should do to bring transparency and accuracy to the proxy advice industry.

The 2004 UN Convention on Jurisdiction Immunities of States and Their Property (2004 Convention) is unlikely to enter into force because of the inclusion of Pre-Judgment Measures of Constraint (PJMC) in the 2004 Convention. PJMCs are a measure such as an attachment, arrest, or injunction that seeks to prevent the dispersal of state assets before a judgment is rendered. However, PJMCs are incompatible with state immunity as developed by civil law jurisdictions, which do not recognise PJMCs as a separate immunity. As such, civil law countries have readily applied these measures against States as their courts considered PJMCs to be governed by the principles of immunity from execution, and thus actionable as exequatur. On the other hand, common law countries have maintained their traditional stance of absolute immunity from suit and have required that a state must consent to PJMCs before courts may freeze assets prior to judgment. By creating the notion of the PJMC, the 2004 Convention adopts the common law approach, which has resulted in civil law countries being reticent to adopt the 2004 Convention. This contribution seeks to show that if civil law countries were to follow Norway’s 2006 declaration, which would remove the separate consent requirement for PJMCs, the 2004 Convention is more likely to enter into force.

Este capítulo centra su atención en los tribunales comerciales internacionales, una figura jurídica novedosa -especialmente en el contexto europeo- y que presenta fascinantes retos para disciplinas como el Derecho internacional privado (DIPr). El objetivo último del presente capítulo es reflexionar sobre los diversos tipos de interacciones que pueden darse entre los referidos international commercial courts y la Convención de Nueva York sobre el reconocimiento y la ejecución de las sentencias arbitrales extranjeras (CNY). Aparte de dejar constancia de que existen recientes y controvertidas creaciones, como la posibilidad de convertir la sentencia de un tribunal comercial internacional -concretamente, de los DIFC courts- en un laudo arbitral que aspira a beneficiarse del mecanismo de reconocimiento y ejecución instaurado por la CNY, este capítulo considera igualmente otros posibles puntos de contacto entre los sectores del arbitraje internacional y la litigación internacional. Así, se recapacita sobre si la “cuota del mercado jurídico global” que desean adquirir los tribunales comerciales internacionales depende de la implantación a nivel internacional de un mecanismo de reconocimiento y ejecución de sentencias que emule los aspectos exitosos de la CNY. Ello a su vez conecta con otra relevante cuestión: el papel de las organizaciones internacionales jurídicas (UNCITRAL, Conferencia de La Haya, etc.) en el desarrollo del arbitraje comercial y la litigación internacional.

The Hellenic Republic became a member of the European Economic Community in 1981. Greece ratified the Brussels Convention by virtue of law Nr. 1814/1988.  A special report was prepared by Professor KERAMEUS and the late Professor EVRIGENIS.  The overall implementation of the Convention by Greek courts has been positive.  Almost 12 years later, Regulation (EC) No 44/2001[Brussels I Regulation] replaced the Brussels Convention. On the whole, the application of the Regulation in the country can be described as satisfactory. Courts proved to be open minded in exequatur proceedings, thus fulfilling the mandate for a free circulation of judgments dictated by the European Union. There were some minor issues that caused scepticism, the majority of which could have been solved by means of an implementing act to the Regulation. Regrettably, Greek governments persistently omit to issue any such acts in the course of ‘communitarisation’ in civil and commercial matters. Consequently, primarily academics and courts are called upon to find viable solutions to problems faced or potentially confronted in the future. Both the Convention and the Regulation have been the subject of scientific research by many Greek academics. The fruits of the above efforts are reflected in a series of monographs since 1990,  unlike the admittedly poor literature of the distant past.
The purpose of this paper is to briefly present the major findings of the nearly 25-year implementation of the aforementioned instruments in the Greek legal order. The paper will elaborate briefly on the new landscape following the entry into force of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 [Brussels I-bis Regulation]. It will focus on the available case law regarding the grounds for refusal, reported  and unreported, avoiding any scrutiny of doctrinal issues discussed and published in the Greek legal press (Part I). It will then attempt a brief analysis of Articles 36 et seq. Brussels I-bis Regulation, regarding their future implementation in the Greek legal order, placing emphasis on some salient issues from the Greek perspective (Part II).

La ejecución forzosa de las resoluciones judiciales sigue dependiendo de los Derechos nacionales, pero está sujeta a ciertas condiciones derivadas de los Reglamentos europeos. De un estudio comparado de los diferentes Reglamentos, se han obtenido una serie de pautas comunes que constituyen un mínimo europeo en materia de ejecución. La coexistencia de exequátur y fuerza ejecutiva directa afecta a cuestiones de procedimiento, pero las causas de oposición basadas en el Derecho nacional son las mismas en ambos casos. Se advierten diferentes estándares de defensa del deudor ejecutado, en particular una especial protección del mismo en el ámbito de Bruselas I bis. Finalmente, el desarrollo de los Reglamentos en la legislación española presenta algunas deficiencias que deberían subsanarse. Palabras clave: ejecución forzosa, resolución judicial, exequátur, título ejecutivo europeo, ejecución directa, denegación de la ejecución. ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS IN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE EUROPEAN REGUL...

The recast Brussels I Regulation entered into force on 10 January 2015. The application ratione temporis of this Regulation is regulated in its Article 66, which provides that judgments issued in proceedings started before the mentioned date, are subjected to the rules of the original version of the Regulation, adopted in 2000. However, the latter entered into force at different times in different Member States, depending on the date of their accession to the EU. As a consequence, in a dispute falling into the material scope of the Regulation, the judges must first determine, which act is temporally applicable, which can sometimes be difficult, especially concerning the recognition and enforcement of judgments.

As was confirmed by the Court of Justice of the EU, the Regulation of 2000 can be applied to the recognition and enforcement of a judgment from another Member State only if, upon the issuance of the judgment, it was already in force in both the state of origin and the state of enforcement. But even in such case, the application of the Regulation is only automatic if also the judicial proceedings were started after the entry into force of the Regulation in both states. If the proceedings were started before that time, the Regulation can only be applied if the court of origin based its jurisdiction on the same rules as can be found in the Regulation or on an international convention in force between the Member States “involved”. In all other cases, national rules or an international convention concerning the recognition and enforcement of judgments must be applied. The article represents a thorough study of the different most common cases where the problem of the application ratione temporis of the Regulation arises or could arise. The article specifically addresses the application ratione temporis of the recast Brussels I Regulation and the relationship between the original and the recast version of the Regulation.


KEYWORDS: Regulation 44/2001, Regulation 1215/2012, Brussels I Regulation, recast Brussels I Regulation, scope of application, application ratione temporis, recognition and enforcement of judgments, exequatur, Brussels Convention, Lugano Convention, jurisdiction, international jurisdiction, foreign judgments.