Enforcement Under the Brussels Convention: Procedural Public Policy and the Influence of Article 6 ECHR

International Lis, pp. 16-20, 2003

10 Pages Posted: 25 May 2007 Last revised: 13 May 2008

See all articles by Xandra E. Kramer

Xandra E. Kramer

Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR), Erasmus School of Law; Utrecht University School of Law

Abstract

This contribution analyzes a decision of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales (Maronier v. Larmer, 29 May 2002) in which the court refusal recognition and enforcement of a Dutch judgment because it violates procedural public policy within the meaning of Art. 27 sub 1 Brussels Convention (= Art. 34 sub 1 Brussels Regulation). The Court of Appeal rules that the Dutch judgment violates Art. 6 ECHR since the case was stayed for 12 years and then reactivated within notification to the defendant (that meanwhile moved to England); the defendant was only notified when the period for appeal had already expired. In this context attention is paid to the function of Art. 6 ECHR in examining the public policy ground of refusal, as well as the ECJ ruling Krombach v. Bamberski.

Keywords: Brussels Convention, Brussels Regulation, enforcement, procedural public policy, Art. 6 ECHR

JEL Classification: K19, K40, K41

Suggested Citation

Kramer, Xandra E., Enforcement Under the Brussels Convention: Procedural Public Policy and the Influence of Article 6 ECHR. International Lis, pp. 16-20, 2003 . Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=988531

Xandra E. Kramer (Contact Author)

Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR), Erasmus School of Law ( email )

3000 DR Rotterdam
Netherlands

Utrecht University School of Law ( email )

Janskerkhof 3
Utrecht, 3512 BK
Netherlands

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
302
rank
95,022
Abstract Views
1,466
PlumX Metrics