The enforcement of foreign judgments in the United Kingdom has undergone a fundamental transformation following Brexit. Whether you are seeking to enforce a judgment obtained in an EU Member State or defending against one, the legal framework that applies will depend on when the underlying proceedings were commenced and the origin of the order in question. Our team has deep experience navigating both regimes and can assist you in achieving swift and effective enforcement - or in resisting recognition where grounds exist to do so.
Judgments from EU Member States were enforced in the United Kingdom under a highly efficient, largely automatic regime where they arose from proceedings commenced before 31 December 2020. The Brussels I Regulation (Recast) (Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012) abolished the requirement for adeclaration of enforceability (exequatur) for judgments given in proceedings commenced on or after 10 January 2015 and before 31 December 2020. A judgment creditor needed only to produce a certificate from the court of origin and a copy of the judgment to proceed directly to enforcement, with very limited grounds on which the judgment debtor could oppose recognition.
For earlier judgments, the Brussels I Regulation (Regulation (EC) No 44/2001) and, before it, the Brussels Convention and the Lugano Convention provided a streamlined registration procedure. In each case, the philosophy underpinning the regime was one of mutual trust between Member States, minimal formality, and rapid cross-border enforcement.
Under the Withdrawal Agreement, the Brussels regime continues to apply to the recognition and enforcement of judgments given in proceedings commenced before 31 December 2020, even where the judgment was handed down, or enforcement is sought, after that date. Accordingly, the relevant date is not the date on which the judgment was handed down, but the date on which the underlying proceedings were commenced - a distinction that is often overlooked.
Since the end of the Transition Period, the United Kingdom is no longer bound by the Brussels regime in relation to proceedings commenced after 01 January 2021. In the absence of an applicable treaty or statutory route, the enforcement of most EU Member State judgments in England and Wales now falls to be determined under the common law rules - a regime that, whilst well-established, imposes a materially different burden on the judgment editor.
At common law, a foreign judgment is not directly enforceable. Instead, the judgment creditor must commence fresh proceedings in the relevant UK jurisdiction,typically by issuing a claim and, in England and Wales, applying for summary judgment on the basis that the foreign court's decision creates a debt obligation which the English court will recognise. The foreign judgment must be final and conclusive, for a definite sum, and rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction as determined by English private international law rules. Defences such as fraud, public policy, and natural justice are available to the judgment debtor and are scrutinised with considerably greater rigour than under the EU framework.
There is, however, an important exception: the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements 2005, to which the United Kingdom acceded in its own right from 1 January 2021. Where the parties have entered into an exclusive choice of court agreement falling within the scope of the Hague Convention, enforcement is governed by the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982, as amended, rather than by the common law. This route is relevant to a significant proportion of commercial disputes.
Certain bilateral treaties and the Administration of Justice Act 1920 and Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1933 continue to provide statutory registration routes for judgments from specific countries, but these do not cover most EU Member States in respect of post-Transition Period judgments.
Our cross-border enforcement practice combines technical mastery of both regimes with a pragmatic, commercially driven approach. We advise on jurisdiction strategy at the outset of disputes, identifying the most efficient route to an enforceable outcome. Where enforcement is contested, we have a strong track record of overcoming challenges to recognition and of deploying the full range of defences available to judgment debtors. Whether the applicable framework is the Brussels Regulation, the Hague Convention or the common law, we deliver clear, decisive advice and effective results.
To discuss how we can assist with the enforcement of a foreign judgment, please contact our dispute resolution team.