Abstract

Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Cases of July 2, 2019 (The 2019 Convention) offered us the option of universal regulation of recognition and authorization of execution of a foreign judgment. However, is he that good? The aim of the work is to identify the advantages and disadvantages of the new universal legal regulation in relation to the issue of jurisdiction. The author analyzes the approaches used in the national legislation of various states to consolidate the rules of international jurisdiction for the purposes of recognition of foreign judicial decisions. General scientific and special methods of cognition, including formal-logical and comparative-legal, were used as research methods. The article demonstrates the dependence of the legal consequences of accession to the 2019 Convention on the approach implemented in national legislation to the regulation of indirect international jurisdiction, as well as on the ratio of the scope of competence of national courts according to national legislation and the jurisdictional filters established in the 2019 Convention. The conclusion is substantiated that the conclusion of the 2019 Convention on the proposed conditions on indirect international jurisdiction does not meet the interests of the Russian Federation. As a measure to increase the competitiveness of the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation, it is proposed to introduce into national legislation legal norms on indirect jurisdiction that consolidate the recognized competence of foreign courts in an amount not exceeding that which defines the competence of national courts to consider cases with a foreign element.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call