Non-Recognition of Foreign Judgments
"A court need [not] recognize a judgment of the court of a foreign state if the [c]ause of action on which judgment was based, or the judgment itself, is repugnant to the public policy of the United States or of the State where recognition is sought."
RESTATEMENT (THIRD) OF THE FOREIGN RELATIONS LAW OF THE UNITED STATES, § 482(d) (1986).
"A court need [not] recognize a judgment of the court of a foreign state if the [c]ause of action on which judgment was based, or the judgment itself, is repugnant to the public policy of the United States or of the State where recognition is sought."
RESTATEMENT (THIRD) OF THE FOREIGN RELATIONS LAW OF THE UNITED STATES, § 482(d) (1986).
“A reservation incompatible with the object and purpose
of a treaty is [void] as a matter of International law.”
Vienna Convention on Law of Treaties, Art. 19, 1155 U.N.T.S. 331.
of a treaty is [void] as a matter of International law.”
Vienna Convention on Law of Treaties, Art. 19, 1155 U.N.T.S. 331.
HUMAN RIGHTS ACT OF 1988: 'ACTS OF ‘PUBLIC AUTHORITIES’':
is an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom Its aim is to "give further effect"
in UK law to the rights contained in the European Convention on Human Rights:
SECT 6.1: “It is [‘unlawful’] for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention right”;
SECT 7.1(b) “A person who [claims] that a public authority has acted (or proposes to act) in a way which is made unlawful by section 6(1) may
- (a) bring proceedings against the authority under this Act in the appropriate court or tribunal,
[OR] rely on the Convention right (or rights) concerned ‘in [any] legal proceeding’.
is an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom Its aim is to "give further effect"
in UK law to the rights contained in the European Convention on Human Rights:
SECT 6.1: “It is [‘unlawful’] for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with a Convention right”;
SECT 7.1(b) “A person who [claims] that a public authority has acted (or proposes to act) in a way which is made unlawful by section 6(1) may
- (a) bring proceedings against the authority under this Act in the appropriate court or tribunal,
[OR] rely on the Convention right (or rights) concerned ‘in [any] legal proceeding’.
Laws regarding the Non-recognition of Foreign Judgments that are obtained by fraud or made contrary to the basic rights of Due Process & 'Natural Justice,' specifically to ensure fair & impartial trials (and procedures), are uniformally considered repugnant to public policy in any country. This language is consistent throughout the United States, Canada and Europe under Foreign Relations Law, under the Human Rights Act 1988 ('ACTS OF PUBLIC AUTHORITIES') and pursuant to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. See also the 'Foreign Judgment Enforcement Guide' for more details...
U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform published a document on October 2011 on "Abusive Foreign Judgments" demonstrates why comity "requires U.S. courts to deny recognition and enforcement to ANY foreign judgment that violates the U.S. Constitution and other deeply rooted domestic principles."
WELL-ESTABLISHED LAW ON FRAUD
|
WELL-ESTABLISHED LAW ON FRAUD
|