Differences Between the Recognition and Enforcement of Authentic Instruments and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments
Abstract
The subject of the article is to analyse and compare the specificity of judgments and authentic instruments in terms of cross-border recognition and enforcement under the Brussels I Recast Regulation framework. Particular focus has been put on the practical aspects of the definition of an authentic instrument. Selected detailed issues arising against this background have been discussed with reference to the Polish legal order as well as the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Based on the undertaken considerations, some proposals have been formulated regarding the enhancement of the free circulation of authentic instruments within the European Union.
Povzetek. Predmet članka je analiza in primerjava posebnosti sodnih odločb in verodostojnih listin z vidika čezmejnega priznavanja in izvrševanja v okviru prenovljene uredbe Bruselj I. Poseben poudarek je namenjen praktičnim vidikom opredelitve verodostojne listine. Izbrana podrobna vprašanja, ki se pojavljajo v tem kontekstu, so bila obravnavana s sklicevanjem na poljski pravni red in sodno prakso Sodišča Evropske unije (SEU). Na podlagi opravljene analize so bili oblikovani nekateri predlogi v zvezi z izboljšanjem prostega pretoka verodostojnih listin v Evropski uniji.
Downloads
References
Cuniberti G. and Rueda I. (2016a) Commentary on Article 39. In: Magnus U., Mankowski P. (Ed.) Brussels Ibis Regulation: Commentary (Köln: Verlag Dr. Otto Schmidt).
Cuniberti G. and Rueda I. (2016b) Commentary on Article 41. In: Magnus U., Mankowski P. (Ed.) Brussels Ibis Regulation: Commentary (Köln: Verlag Dr. Otto Schmidt).
Cuniberti G. and Rueda I. (2016c) Commentary on Article 42. In: Magnus U., Mankowski P. (Ed.) Brussels Ibis Regulation: Commentary (Köln: Verlag Dr. Otto Schmidt).
Dickinson A., Lein E. (Ed.) (2015) The Brussels I Regulation Recast (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Fitchen J. and Kramer X. (2015) Authentic Instruments and Court Settlements (Arts. 58-60). In: Dickinson A., Lein E. (Ed.) The Brussels I Regulation Recast (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Francq S. (2016) Commentary on Article 45. In: Magnus U., Mankowski P. (Ed.) (2016) Brussels Ibis Regulation: Commentary (Köln: Verlag Dr. Otto Schmidt).
Frąckowiak-Adamska A. (2018) Uznawanie i wykonywanie orzeczeń w sprawach cywilnych w Unii Europejskiej Ujęcie systemowe (Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer).
Gołaczyński J. (2015), Commentary on Article 58. In J. Gołaczyński (Ed.) (2015), Jurysdykcja, uznawanie orzeczeń sądowych oraz ich wykonywanie w sprawach cywilnych i handlowych. Rozporządzenie Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady (UE) Nr 1215/2012. Komentarz (Warszawa: C.H. Beck).
Jenard report on the convention on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, Official Journal 1979, c 59, pp. 42-43.
Kramer X. (2016) Commentary on Article 58. In: Dickinson A., Lein E. (Ed.) The Brussels I Regulation Recast (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Kramer X., Ontanu A., de Rooij M. et al. (2018) The Application of Brussels I (Recast) in the Legal Practice of EU Member States: Synthesis Report. Available at: https://www.asser.nl/media/5018/m-5797-ec-justice-the-application-of-brussels-1-09-outputs-synthesis-report.pdf (accessed: 07.09.2020).
Mankowski P. (2016a) Commentary on Article 36. In: Magnus U., Mankowski P. (Ed.) (2016) Brussels Ibis Regulation: Commentary (Köln: Verlag Dr. Otto Schmidt).
Mankowski P. (2016b) Commentary on Article 61. In: Magnus U., Mankowski P. (Ed.) (2016) Brussels Ibis Regulation: Commentary (Köln: Verlag Dr. Otto Schmidt).
Magnus U., Mankowski P. (Ed.) (2016) Brussels Ibis Regulation: Commentary (Köln: Verlag Dr. Otto Schmidt).
Vekas L. (2016) Commentary on Article 58. In: Magnus U., Mankowski P. (Ed.) (2016) Brussels Ibis Regulation: Commentary (Köln: Verlag Dr. Otto Schmidt).
Zalisko M. (2015a) Commentary on Article 39. In: Gołaczyński J. (Ed.) Jurysdykcja, uznawanie orzeczeń sądowych oraz ich wykonywanie w sprawach cywilnych i handlowych. Rozporządzenie Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady (UE) Nr 1215/2012. Komentarz (Warszawa: C.H. Beck).
Zalisko M. (2015b) Commentary on Article 42. In: Gołaczyński J. (Ed.) Jurysdykcja, uznawanie orzeczeń sądowych oraz ich wykonywanie w sprawach cywilnych i handlowych. Rozporządzenie Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady (UE) Nr 1215/2012. Komentarz (Warszawa: C.H. Beck).
Zalisko M. (2015c) Commentary on Article 58. In: Gołaczyński J. (Ed.) Jurysdykcja, uznawanie orzeczeń sądowych oraz ich wykonywanie w sprawach cywilnych i handlowych. Rozporządzenie Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady (UE) Nr 1215/2012. Komentarz (Warszawa: C.H. Beck).
Zatorska J. (2015) Komentarz do rozporządzenia nr 1215/2012 w sprawie jurysdykcji i uznawania orzeczeń sądowych oraz ich wykonywania w sprawach cywilnych i handlowych (System Informacji Prawnej LEX).
Case-law
Judgment of the Court of 2 April 2009 in the case C-394/07 Gambazzi v. DaimlerChrysler Canada Inc. and CIBC Mellon Trust Company, ECR 2009 I-02563.
Judgment of the Court of 28 March 2000 in the case C-7/98 Krombach v. André Bamberski, ECR 2000 I-01935.
Judgment of the Court of 29 April 1999 in the case C-267/97 Eric Coursier v. Fortis Bank and Martine Coursier, née Bellami, ECR 1999 I-02543.
Judgment of the Court of 17 June 1999 in case C-260/97 Unibank A/S v. Flemming G. Christensen, ECR 1999 I-03715.
Judgment of the Court of 13 July 1993 in the case C-42/92 Adrianus Thijssen v Controledienst voor de verzekeringen, ECR 1993 I-04047.
Judgment of the Court of 23 May 2011 in the case C – 52/08 European Commision v. Portuguese Republic, 2011 I-04275.
Judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal of the Republic of Poland of 14 April 2015 in the case P 45/12, OTK-A 2015/4/46.
