Critically compare and contrast the common law and Brussels I Regulations regimes for the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. Give examples from case law to support your answer.
Critically compare and contrast the common law and Brussels I Regulation’s regimes for the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. Give examples from case law to support your answer.
Common Law and the Brussels 1 Regulation have different interpretations on recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments.
The Common Law’s rules for recognition and enforcement include all foreign judgments with the exception of those taking place in the courts of Member States. There are special requirements set by common law in accepting foreign judgments and are dependant on a judge’s discretion. It requires that the litigant institute fresh proceedings in England in order to enforce a foreign judgment.[1] The Administration of Justice Act 1920 and the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1933 are used in tandem with common law for issuing a judgment. “If a foreign judgment is entitled to recognition or is enforceable in English courts, then according to s 34, the claimant has to sue on the foreign judgment rather than bring fresh proceedings on the original cause of action.”[2] Also in accordance with 9(1) any commonwealth judgment may apply for registration to the High Court within 12 months, however the registration could be rejected unless it is strongly believed that the circumstances should be enforced in the UK.[3]