prop · H20393 · 2015-04-08 00:00:00 — Genom EU:s godkännande av är konventionen bindande för och övriga medlemsstater i EU förutom . När konventionen träder i kraft blir den direkt tillämplig i . EU avser att lämna två förklaringar. Vilka dessa förklaringar är framgår av rådsbeslutet om EU:s godkännande av konventionen. Enligt den ena förklaringen kommer konventionen som huvudregel inte att vara tillämplig på försäkringsavtal. Den andra förklaringen innebär att EU, i ett senare skede, avser att ompröva behovet av den första förklaringen. Att lagen även kompletterar innebär att bestämmelsen om reservforum i 2 § blir tillämplig. Den innebär att är behörig domstol när det finns internationell behörighet att ta upp ett mål i enligt konventionen, men svenska nationella forumregler inte anvisar någon behörig domstol. Övriga ändringar är redaktionella. Verkställbarhet och verkställighet enligt En ansökan om att ett avgörande ska förklaras verkställbart i enligt görs till den tingsrätt som regeringen föreskriver. Paragrafen, som är ny, innehåller en bestämmelse om behörig domstol för ansökningar om verkställbarhetsförklaring (exekvatur) enligt . Övervägandena finns i avsnitt 6.3. Av paragrafen framgår att ansökan ska göras till den tingsrätt som regeringen föreskriver. Det är alltså regeringen som meddelar föreskrifter om vilka av landets tingsrätter som ska vara behöriga att pröva ansökningar om verkställbarhetsförklaring. I artikel 13.1 och 13.2 finns bestämmelser om vilka handlingar som ska bifogas en ansökan som avses i 17 § och om komplettering i vissa fall. Vid handläggning i domstol tillämpas i övrigt lagen (1996:242) om domstolsärenden. I paragrafen, som är ny, regleras vilka processrättsliga bestämmelser som ska tillämpas i ärenden om verkställbarhetsförklaring enligt . Övervägandena finns i avsnitt 6.3. finns en bestämmelse som anger vilka handlingar som ska bifogas en ansökan om verkställbarhetsförklaring (artikel 13.1). Av konventionen framgår även att domstolen kan begära in de ytterligare handlingar som behövs för att bedöma om det finns förutsättningar att förklara ett avgörande verkställbart (artikel 13.2). För att underlätta för tillämparna finns det i paragrafen en upplysning om dessa bestämmelser. I paragrafen anges vidare att lagen (1996:242) om domstolsärenden (ärendelagen) tillämpas vid domstolarnas handläggning i övrigt av ärenden om verkställbarhetsförklaring enligt . Ärendelagen innehåller regler om bl.a. domstolarnas sammansättning (3 §), vilka uppgifter en ansökan ska innehålla (6 §), brister i en inledande skrivelse m.m. (9 och 10 §§) och handläggningen i allmänhet. Av ärendelagen framgår att beslut får överklagas till hovrätten respektive och att prövningstillstånd krävs i båda instanserna (39 och 40 §§). I fråga om översättning av handlingar tillämpas 48 § ärendelagen i stället för konventionens bestämmelse om översättning av handlingar som bifogas ansökan (jfr artikel 13.4 andra ledet). Om ett avgörande förklaras verkställbart enligt , verkställs avgörandet enligt utsökningsbalken på samma sätt som en svensk dom som har fått laga kraft. Paragrafen, som är ny, innehåller en kompletterande bestämmelse om vad som gäller för verkställighet av utländska avgöranden som förklarats verkställbara enligt . Övervägandena finns i avsnitt 6.4. Av bestämmelsen framgår att utländska avgöranden som förklarats verkställbara enligt verkställs enligt utsökningsbalken (UB). Verkställighet är inte en automatisk följd av ett beslut om verkställbarhetsförklaring. En ansökan om verkställighet måste göras hos . Avgörandet verkställs på samma sätt som en svensk dom som har fått laga kraft. Bestämmelserna om domar som inte fått laga kraft i 3 kap. 4–10 §§ UB tillämpas alltså inte. Däremot finns det i konventionen regler som gör det möjligt för en domstol att skjuta upp prövningen av en ansökan om verkställbarhet eller att vägra att förklara en dom verkställbar om domen i fråga har överklagats eller om tidsfristen för ett ordinärt överklagande ännu inte har löpt ut (se artikel 8.4). Denna lag träder i kraft den dag som regeringen bestämmer. Det överlämnas till regeringen att bestämma när lagen ska träda i kraft. Denna tidpunkt ska sammanfalla med den tidpunkt då träder i kraft i förhållande till EU och därmed . Övervägandena finns i avsnitt 7. CONVENTION ON CHOICE OF COURT AGREEMENTS1 (Concluded 30 2005) The States Parties to the present Convention, Desiring to promote international trade and investment through enhanced judicial co-operation, Believing that such co-operation can be enhanced by uniform rules on jurisdiction and on recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in civil or commercial matters, Believing that such enhanced co-operation requires in particular an international legal regime that provides certainty and ensures the effectiveness of exclusive choice of court agreements between parties to commercial transactions and that governs the recognition and enforcement of judgments resulting from proceedings based on such agreements, resolved to conclude this Convention and have agreed upon the following provisions – CHAPTER I – SCOPE AND DEFINITIONS (1)This Convention shall apply in international cases to exclusive choice of court agreements concluded in civil or commercial matters. (2)For the purposes of Chapter II, a case is international unless the parties are resident in the same and the relationship of the parties and all other elements relevant to the dispute, regardless of the location of the chosen court, are connected only with that State. (3)For the purposes of Chapter III, a case is international where recognition or enforcement of a foreign judgment is sought. (1)This Convention shall not apply to exclusive choice of court agreements – a)to which a natural person acting primarily for personal, family or household purposes (a consumer) is a party; b)relating to contracts of employment, including collective agreements. (2)This Convention shall not apply to the following matters – a)the status and legal capacity of natural persons; b)maintenance obligations; c)other family law matters, including matrimonial property regimes and other rights or obligations arising out of marriage or similar relationships; d)wills and succession; e)insolvency, composition and analogous matters; f)the carriage of passengers and goods; g)pollution, limitation of liability for claims, general average, and emergency towage and salvage; 1 This Convention, including related materials, is accessible on the website of the Hague Conference on (), under “Conventions” or under the “Choice of Court Section”. For the full history of the Convention, see Hague Conference on , (2005), , Choice of Court (, Intersentia, Antwerp, 2010, 871 pp. h)anti-trust (competition) matters; i)liability for nuclear damage; j)claims for personal injury brought by or on behalf of natural persons; k)tort or delict claims for damage to tangible property that do not arise from a contractual relationship; l)rights in rem in immovable property, and tenancies of immovable property; m)the validity, nullity, or dissolution of legal persons, and the validity of decisions of their organs; n)the validity of intellectual property rights other than copyright and related rights; o)infringement of intellectual property rights other than copyright and related rights, except where infringement proceedings are brought for breach of a contract between the parties relating to such rights, or could have been brought for breach of that contract; p)the validity of entries in public registers. (3)Notwithstanding paragraph 2, proceedings are not excluded from the scope of this Convention where a matter excluded under that paragraph arises merely as a preliminary question and not as an object of the proceedings. In particular, the mere fact that a matter excluded under paragraph 2 arises by way of defence does not exclude proceedings from the Convention, if that matter is not an object of the proceedings. (4)This Convention shall not apply to arbitration and related proceedings. (5)Proceedings are not excluded from the scope of this Convention by the mere fact that a State, including a government, a governmental agency or any person acting for a State, is a party thereto. (6)Nothing in this Convention shall affect privileges and immunities of States or of international organisations, in respect of themselves and of their property. Exclusive choice of court agreements For the purposes of this Convention – a)“exclusive choice of court agreement” means an agreement concluded by two or more parties that meets the requirements of paragraph c) and designates, for the purpose of deciding disputes which have arisen or may arise in connection with a particular legal relationship, the courts of one or one or more specific courts of one to the exclusion of the jurisdiction of any other courts; b)a choice of court agreement which designates the courts of one or one or more specific courts of one be deemed to be exclusive unless the parties have expressly provided otherwise; c)an exclusive choice of court agreement must be concluded or documented – i)in writing; or ii)by any other means of communication which renders information accessible so as to be usable for subsequent reference; d)an exclusive choice of court agreement that forms part of a contract shall be treated as an agreement independent of the other terms of the contract. The validity of the exclusive choice of court agreement cannot be contested solely on the ground that the contract is not valid. (1)In this Convention, “judgment” means any decision on the merits given by a court, whatever it may be called, including a decree or order, and a determination of costs or expenses by the court (including an officer of the court), provided that the determination relates to a decision on the merits which may be recognised or enforced under this Convention. An interim measure of protection is not a judgment. (2)For the purposes of this Convention, an entity or person other than a natural person shall be considered to be resident in the State – a)where it has its statutory seat; b)under whose law it was incorporated or formed; c)where it has its central administration; or d)where it has its principal place of business. CHAPTER II – JURISDICTION Jurisdiction of the chosen court (1)The court or courts of a designated in an exclusive choice of court agreement shall have jurisdiction to decide a dispute to which the agreement applies, unless the agreement is null and void under the law of that State. (2)A court that has jurisdiction under paragraph 1 shall not decline to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that the dispute should be decided in a court of another State. (3)The preceding paragraphs shall not affect rules – a)on jurisdiction related to subject matter or to the value of the claim; b)on the internal allocation of jurisdiction among the courts of a . However, where the chosen court has discretion as to whether to transfer a case, due consideration should be given to the choice of the parties. Obligations of a court not chosen A court of a other than that of the chosen court shall suspend or dismiss proceedings to which an exclusive choice of court agreement applies unless – a)the agreement is null and void under the law of the State of the chosen court; b)a party lacked the capacity to conclude the agreement under the law of the State of the court seised; c)giving effect to the agreement would lead to a manifest injustice or would be manifestly contrary to the public policy of the State of the court seised; d)for exceptional reasons beyond the control of the parties, the agreement cannot reasonably be performed; or e)the chosen court has decided not to hear the case. Interim measures of protection Interim measures of protection are not governed by this Convention. This Convention neither requires nor precludes the grant, refusal or termination of interim measures of protection by a court of a and does not affect whether or not a party may request or a court should grant, refuse or terminate such measures. CHAPTER III – RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT (1)A judgment given by a court of a designated in an exclusive choice of court agreement shall be recognised and enforced in other Contracting States in accordance with this Chapter. Recognition or enforcement may be refused only on the grounds specified in this Convention. (2)Without prejudice to such review as is necessary for the application of the provisions of this Chapter, there shall be no review of the merits of the judgment given by the court of origin. The court addressed shall be bound by the findings of fact on which the court of origin based its jurisdiction, unless the judgment was given by default. (3)A judgment shall be recognised only if it has effect in the State of origin, and shall be enforced only if it is enforceable in the State of origin. (4)Recognition or enforcement may be postponed or refused if the judgment is the subject of review in the State of origin or if the time limit for seeking ordinary review has not expired. refusal does not prevent a subsequent application for recognition or enforcement of the judgment. (5)This Article shall also apply to a judgment given by a court of a pursuant to a transfer of the case from the chosen court in that as permitted by Article 5, paragraph 3. However, where the chosen court had discretion as to whether to transfer the case to another court, recognition or enforcement of the judgment may be refused against a party who objected to the transfer in a timely in the State of origin. Refusal of recognition or enforcement Recognition or enforcement may be refused if – a)the agreement was null and void under the law of the State of the chosen court, unless the chosen court has determined that the agreement is valid; b)a party lacked the capacity to conclude the agreement under the law of the requested State; c)the document which instituted the proceedings or an equivalent document, including the essential elements of the claim, i)was not notified to the defendant in sufficient time and in such a way as to enable him to arrange for his defence, unless the defendant entered an appearance and presented his case without contesting notification in the court of origin, provided that the law of the State of origin permitted notification to be contested; or ii)was notified to the defendant in the requested State in a that is incompatible with fundamental principles of the requested State concerning service of documents; d)the judgment was obtained by fraud in connection with a matter of procedure; e)recognition or enforcement would be manifestly incompatible with the public policy of the requested State, including situations where the specific proceedings leading to the judgment were incompatible with fundamental principles of procedural fairness of that State; f)the judgment is inconsistent with a judgment given in the requested State in a dispute between the same parties; or g)the judgment is inconsistent with an earlier judgment given in another State between the same parties on the same cause of action, provided that the earlier judgment fulfils the conditions necessary for its recognition in the requested State. (1)Where a matter excluded under Article 2, paragraph 2, or under Article 21, arose as a preliminary question, the ruling on that question shall not be recognised or enforced under this Convention. (2)Recognition or enforcement of a judgment may be refused if, and to the extent that, the judgment was based on a ruling on a matter excluded under Article 2, paragraph 2. (3)However, in the case of a ruling on the validity of an intellectual property right other than copyright or a related right, recognition or enforcement of a judgment may be refused or postponed under the preceding paragraph only where – a)that ruling is inconsistent with a judgment or a decision of a competent authority on that matter given in the State under the law of which the intellectual property right arose; or b)proceedings concerning the validity of the intellectual property right are pending in that State. (4)Recognition or enforcement of a judgment may be refused if, and to the extent that, the judgment was based on a ruling on a matter excluded pursuant to a declaration made by the requested State under Article 21. (1)Recognition or enforcement of a judgment may be refused if, and to the extent that, the judgment awards damages, including exemplary or punitive damages, that do not compensate a party for actual loss or harm suffered. (2)The court addressed shall take into account whether and to what extent the damages awarded by the court of origin serve to cover costs and expenses relating to the proceedings. Judicial settlements (transactions judiciaires) Judicial settlements (transactions judiciaires) which a court of a designated in an exclusive choice of court agreement has approved, or which have been concluded before that court in the course of proceedings, and which are enforceable in the same as a judgment in the State of origin, shall be enforced under this Convention in the same as a judgment. Documents to be produced (1)The party seeking recognition or applying for enforcement shall produce – a)a complete and certified copy of the judgment; b)the exclusive choice of court agreement, a certified copy thereof, or other evidence of its existence; c)if the judgment was given by default, the original or a certified copy of a document establishing that the document which instituted the proceedings or an equivalent document was notified to the defaulting party; d)any documents necessary to establish that the judgment has effect or, where applicable, is enforceable in the State of origin; e)in the case referred to in Article 12, a certificate of a court of the State of origin that the judicial settlement or a part of it is enforceable in the same as a judgment in the State of origin. (2)If the terms of the judgment do not permit the court addressed to verify whether the conditions of this Chapter have been complied with, that court may require any necessary documents. (3)An application for recognition or enforcement may be accompanied by a document, issued by a court (including an officer of the court) of the State of origin, in the form recommended and published by the Hague Conference on . (4)If the documents referred to in this Article are not in an official language of the requested State, they shall be accompanied by a certified translation into an official language, unless the law of the requested State provides otherwise. The procedure for recognition, declaration of enforceability or registration for enforcement, and the enforcement of the judgment, are governed by the law of the requested State unless this Convention provides otherwise. The court addressed shall act expeditiously. Recognition or enforcement of a severable part of a judgment shall be granted where recognition or enforcement of that part is applied for, or only part of the judgment is capable of being recognised or enforced under this Convention. CHAPTER IV – GENERAL (1)This Convention shall apply to exclusive choice of court agreements concluded after its entry into force for the State of the chosen court. (2)This Convention shall not apply to proceedings instituted before its entry into force for the State of the court seised. Contracts of insurance and reinsurance (1)Proceedings under a contract of insurance or reinsurance are not excluded from the scope of this Convention on the ground that the contract of insurance or reinsurance relates to a matter to which this Convention does not apply. (2)Recognition and enforcement of a judgment in respect of liability under the terms of a contract of insurance or reinsurance may not be limited or refused on the ground that the liability under that contract includes liability to indemnify the insured or reinsured in respect of – a)a matter to which this Convention does not apply; or b)an award of damages to which Article 11 might apply. All documents forwarded or delivered under this Convention shall be exempt from legalisation or any analogous formality, including an Apostille. A State may declare that its courts may refuse to determine disputes to which an exclusive choice of court agreement applies if, except for the location of the chosen court, there is no connection between that State and the parties or the dispute. Declarations limiting recognition and enforcement A State may declare that its courts may refuse to recognise or enforce a judgment given by a court of another if the parties were resident in the requested State, and the relationship of the parties and all other elements relevant to the dispute, other than the location of the chosen court, were connected only with the requested State. Declarations with respect to specific matters (1)Where a State has a strong interest in not applying this Convention to a specific matter, that State may declare that it will not apply the Convention to that matter. making such a declaration shall ensure that the declaration is no broader than necessary and that the specific matter excluded is clearly and precisely defined. (2)With regard to that matter, the Convention shall not apply – a)in the that made the declaration; b)in other Contracting States, where an exclusive choice of court agreement designates the courts, or one or more specific courts, of the State that made the declaration. Reciprocal declarations on non-exclusive choice of court agreements (1)A may declare that its courts will recognise and enforce judgments given by courts of other Contracting States designated in a choice of court agreement concluded by two or more parties that meets the requirements of Article 3, paragraph c), and designates, for the purpose of deciding disputes which have arisen or may arise in connection with a particular legal relationship, a court or courts of one or more Contracting States (a non-exclusive choice of court agreement). (2)Where recognition or enforcement of a judgment given in a that has made such a declaration is sought in another that has made such a declaration, the judgment shall be recognised and enforced under this Convention, if – a)the court of origin was designated in a non-exclusive choice of court agreement; b)there exists neither a judgment given by any other court before which proceedings could be brought in accordance with the non-exclusive choice of court agreement, nor a proceeding pending between the same parties in any other such court on the same cause of action; and c)the court of origin was the court first seised. In the interpretation of this Convention, regard shall be had to its international character and to the need to promote uniformity in its application. Review of operation of the Convention The Secretary General of the Hague Conference on at regular intervals make arrangements for – a)review of the operation of this Convention, including any declarations; and b)consideration of whether any amendments to this Convention are desirable. (1)In relation to a in which two or more systems of law apply in different territorial units with regard to any matter dealt with in this Convention – a)any reference to the law or procedure of a State shall be construed as referring, where appropriate, to the law or procedure in force in the relevant territorial unit; b)any reference to in a State shall be construed as referring, where appropriate, to in the relevant territorial unit; c)any reference to the court or courts of a State shall be construed as referring, where appropriate, to the court or courts in the relevant territorial unit; d)any reference to a connection with a State shall be construed as referring, where appropriate, to a connection with the relevant territorial unit.