Brussels, 21/04/2009 (Agence Europe) - On Tuesday 21 April, the European Commission adopted a Green Paper with a view to ensuring the free circulation of judgments in civil and commercial matters in the European Union, on the basis of mutual recognition of cross-border judgments. “Abolishing the remaining obstacles will make it easier and speedier for citizens and business to have access to justice abroad. It will thus complete the European area of justice and profit the functioning of the internal market”, said Jacques Barrot, European Justice Commissioner. Consultation is open to all concerned until 30 June. At the end of 2009, the Commission should then present a proposal for revision of the current regulation (Brussels I Regulation) - EC Regulation No 44/2001 concerning jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.
At the same time as adoption of the Green Paper, the Commission adopted a report following the assessment of seven years of application of the Brussels I regulation. Generally speaking, the report concludes that application of the regulation in the EU has been highly successful. Various points are examined in the report: - removal of the remaining obstacles to free circulation of judgments, i.e. the removal of “exequatur”; - the protection of European citizens and companies in case of disputes with parties domiciled in third states, in particular by ensuring equal access to the courts of the member states and equal protection against judgments given by the courts of third states against European defendants; - and, finally, certain imperfections in the application of certain rules of the regulation, such as avoiding parallel proceedings in different member states and ensuring the sound application of contractual agreements as to which courts will deal with the case in the Union.
The Green Paper sets out possible ways to make progress on questions raised by the report and especially that on abolishing exequatur, a procedure that allows enforceability to be given in one member state to a judgment made in another member state. “It is difficult to justify, in an internal market without frontiers, that citizens and businesses have to undergo the expenses in terms of costs and time to assert their rights abroad”, the Commission Green Paper says, going on to explain: “Applications for declarations of enforceability are almost always successful and recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments is very rarely refused”. Nonetheless, the Commission considers “aiming for the objective of abolishing the exequatur practice in all civil and commercial matters should be realistic”. “The abolition of exequatur should, however, be accompanied by the necessary safeguards”, it states. In the area of uncontested claims, intermediate measures have been abolished on the basis of a control, in the member state of origin, of minimum standards relating to the service of the document instituting proceedings and the provision of information about the claim and the procedure to the defendant. However, “special review” should be foreseen if a person has been unable to organise his/her own defence or was unable to object to the claim for reasons of force majeure or extraordinary circumstances. The claimant must still go through a certification procedure, albeit in the member state of origin rather than in the member state of enforcement.
The Green Paper also aims to strengthen the protection of EU citizens and business faced with third country jurisdiction. For this, the Commission envisages the creation of new additional rules on jurisdiction. It also envisages the possibility of creating a common regime for the recognition and application of third country judgments which would allow foreign countries to know how their decisions are applied in Europe. The Commission is examining, moreover, solutions for strengthening agreements between national jurisdictions aimed at the choice of court, as well as choices for strengthening intellectual property rights. Other points are finally envisaged such as improved free circulation of provisional measures, greater effectiveness at EU level of arbitration agreements, and coordination between arbitration procedures and judiciary procedures.