Comparative Recognition And Enforcement

"Due to the operation of territorial sovereignty, a foreign decision has no extraterritorial reach unless and until it is given effect by an enforcing court (on behalf of the enforcing State). Although many enforcing courts regularly recognise or enforce foreign decisions, this state practice is not considered specific enough to create binding rules of customary international law mandating enforcement or recognition.0F This is so despite recurrent arguments that giving effect to foreign decisions ought be considered a matter of customary international law"--

"Due to the operation of territorial sovereignty, a foreign decision has no extraterritorial reach unless and until it is given effect by an enforcing court (on behalf of the enforcing State). Although many enforcing courts regularly recognise or enforce foreign decisions, this state practice is not considered specific enough to create binding rules of customary international law mandating enforcement or recognition.0F This is so despite recurrent arguments that giving effect to foreign decisions ought be considered a matter of customary international law"--

This Research Collection offers a 24-article tour of the topics surrounding the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. Edited by two leading experts in the field, the collection explores different approaches to, and comparative perspectives of, judgment recognition and enforcement. Topics covered include the special issues of the revenue rule and the role of public law, the effects of fraud, the scope of preclusion, and the impact of class actions. The collection also looks to the future, considering possible solutions to harmonizing recognition and enforcement and assessing how the development of human rights may impact judgement recognition and enforcement. Prefaced by an original and informative introduction by the editors, this collection is an essential resource for those studying, researching or practicing in this area.

Judgment recognition and enforcement (JRE) between the US states, between EU Member States, and between mainland China, Hong Kong and Macao, are all forms of 'interregional JRE'. This extensive comparative study of the three most important JRE regimes focuses on what lessons China can draw from the US and the EU in developing a multilateral JRE arrangement for mainland China, Hong Kong and Macao.Mainland China, Hong Kong and Macao share economic, geographical, cultural, and historical proximity to one another. The policy of 'One Country, Two Systems' also provides a quasi-constitutional regime for the three regions. However, there is no multilateral JRE scheme among them, as there is in the US and the EU; and it is harder to recognise and enforce sister-region judgments in China than in the US and the EU. The book analyses the status quo of JRE in China and explores its insufficiencies; it proposes a multilateral JRE arrangement for Chinese regions to alleviate current JRE difficulties; and it also provides solutions for the macro and micro challenges of establishing a multilateral arrangement, drawing upon the rich literature on JRE regimes found in the US and the EU. ENDORSEMENTS 'Professor Huang has completed a highly readable and comprehensive study of the issues governing recognition and enforcement of judgments among the three distinct legal regimes of the People's Republic of China...Her ideas will surely enrich the Chinese debate as well as provide interesting scholarly material for non-Chinese seeking greater understanding of legal reform in the PRC'. Peter D Trooboff, Senior Counsel, Covington & Burling LLP, Washington DC, USA 'The book shows meticulous, analytical and comparative scholarship. Dr Huang's proposal of a multilateral arrangement makes an original and valuable contribution to the study of interregional judgment recognition and enforcement among Mainland China, Hong Kong, and Macao'. Renshan Liu, Professor and Dean, Law School of Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, China 'Dr Huang's timely work provides an insightful analysis of one of the more vexed aspects of the inter-regional legal relations in Greater China. Her careful investigation makes a valuable contribution to the academic and practical work on the recognition and enforcement of judgments between China and her two special administrative regions. The comparative approach she adopts represents the true utility of comparativism for legal scholarship'. Bing Ling, Professor of Chinese Law, Sydney Law School, Australia PREFACE AND FOREWORD Please click on the link below to read the preface and foreword: www.hartpub.co.uk/Huang_Preface_Foreword.pdf The book won the First Prize for Excellent Scholarship awarded by the China Society of Private International Law in 2015.

This book examines how the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, commonly known as The New York Convention, has been understood and applied in [insert number] jurisdictions, including virtually all that are leading international arbitration centers. It begins with a general report surveying and synthesizing national responses to a large number of critical issues in the Convention’s interpretation and application. It is followed by national reports, all of which are organized in accordance with a common questionnaire raising these critical issues. Following introductory remarks, each report addresses the following aspects of the Convention which include its basic implementation within the national legal system; enforcement by local courts of agreements to arbitrate (including grounds for withholding enforcement), recognition and enforcement of foreign awards by local courts under the Convention (including grounds for denying recognition and enforcement), and essential procedural issues in the courts’ conduct of recognition and enforcement. Each report concludes with an overall assessment of the Convention’s interpretation and application on national territory and recommendations, if any, for reform. The New York Convention was intended to enhance the workings of the international arbitral system, primarily by ensuring that arbitral awards are readily recognizable and enforceable in States other than the State in which they are rendered, subject of course to certain safeguards reflected by the Convention’s limited grounds for denying recognition or enforcement. It secondarily binds signatory states to enforce the arbitration agreements on the basis of which awards under the Convention will be rendered. Despite its exceptionally wide adoption and its broad coverage, the New York Convention depends for its efficacy on the conduct of national actors, and national courts in particular. Depending on the view of international law prevailing in a given State, the Convention may require statutory implementation at the national level. Beyond that, the Convention requires of national courts an apt understanding of the principles and policies that underlie the Convention’s various provisions. Through its in-depth coverage of the understandings of the Convention that prevail across national legal systems, the book gives practitioners and scholars a much-improved appreciation of the New York Convention “on the ground.”

Transnational Litigation in Comparative Perspective: Theory and Application is the only casebook that examines the principal issues in transnational litigation from a comparative perspective. Each chapter focuses on a particular core problem that all legal systems must address. The first half of each chapter is devoted to exploring the theoretical context of the issue, thereby enabling students to appreciate the complexity of the problem and to see how achieving a resolution requires balancing competing interests. The second part of each chapter then focuses on how different systems deal with these challenges. Topics covered include protective measures, personal jurisdiction, forum non conveniens, forum selection clauses, state immunity, state doctrine, service of process, gathering evidence abroad, choice of law, and recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. Distinctive Features *Uses a comparative approach that better prepares future lawyers for international litigation that may be initiated in countries other than the U.S. *Offers a hypothetical at the beginning of each chapter to introduce the fundamental issue; the hypotheticals raise questions that are diagnostic rather than prescriptive, leading to many "right" answers *Accommodates different types of courses--professors who employ a less theoretical approach can use the hypotheticals to ground class discussions *Considers issues unique to arbitration as they arise in connection with the various topics studied