LIBER AMICORUM KREŠIMIR SAJKO, Hrvoje Sikiric, Vilim, Boucek, & Davor Babic, eds., Forthcoming
28 Pages Posted: 29 Jun 2010
Date Written: June 23, 2010
This chapter, written to honor Professor Krešimir Sajko of the University of Zagreb, considers the question of personal jurisdiction in U.S. courts at the stage of submission of a foreign judgment for recognition. Existing cases dealing with both recognition of foreign judgments and with the recognition of foreign arbitral awards under the New York Convention fail to provide a clear position on (1) whether either personal jurisdiction or quasi in rem jurisdiction through the presence of the judgment/award debtor’s assets is required, and (2) if quasi in rem jurisdiction is relied upon, just what allegation or proof of the presence of the judgment/award debtor’s assets within the jurisdiction is necessary. The analysis here ends with the conclusion that due process for purposes of recognition jurisdiction may be satisfied based on concepts of consent that are fundamental to the operation of both the New York Convention and the 2005 Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements. Such a result would place the United States in a position consistent with its future treaty partners under the Hague Convention on the matter of recognition jurisdiction.
Keywords: Recognition Jurisdiction, Personal Jurisdiction, Quasi in Rem Jurisdiction, Foreign Judgments, Foreign Arbitral Awards, U.S. Courts, New York Convention, Hague Convention On Choice Of Court Agreements, Professor Krešimir Sajko, University Of Zagreb
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Brand, Ronald A., Recognition Jurisdiction and the Hague Choice of Court Convention (June 23, 2010). LIBER AMICORUM KREŠIMIR SAJKO, Hrvoje Sikiric, Vilim, Boucek, & Davor Babic, eds., Forthcoming; University of Pittsburgh Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2010-23. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1629360