CELEX: 62020CN0700
Language: en
Date: 2020-12-22 00:00:00
Title: Case C-700/20: Reference for a preliminary ruling from High Court of Justice Business and Property Courts of England and Wales (United Kingdom) made on 22 December 2020 — London Steam-Ship Owners’ Mutual Insurance Association Limited v Kingdom of Spain

29.3.2021   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 110/18
            
         
      Reference for a preliminary ruling from High Court of Justice Business and Property Courts of England and Wales (United Kingdom) made on 22 December 2020 — London Steam-Ship Owners’ Mutual Insurance Association Limited v Kingdom of Spain
      (Case C-700/20)
      (2021/C 110/19)
      Language of the case: English
      
         Referring court
      
      High Court of Justice Business and Property Courts of England and Wales
      
         Parties to the main proceedings
      
      
         Applicant: London Steam-Ship Owners’ Mutual Insurance Association Limited
      
         Defendant: Kingdom of Spain
      
         Questions referred
      
      
                  1.
               
               
                  Given the nature of the issues which the national court is required to determine in deciding whether to enter judgment in the terms of an award under Section 66 of the Arbitration Act 1996, is a judgment granted pursuant to that provision capable of constituting a relevant ‘judgment’ of the Member State in which recognition is sought for the purposes of Article 34(3) of EC Regulation No 44/2001 (1)?
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Given that a judgment entered in the terms of an award, such as a judgment under Section 66 of the Arbitration Act 1996, is a judgment falling outside the material scope of Regulation No 44/2001 by reason of the Article l(2)(d) arbitration exception, is such a judgment capable of constituting a relevant ‘judgment’ of the Member State in which recognition is sought for the purposes of Article 34(3) of the Regulation?
               
            
                  3.
               
               
                  On the hypothesis that Article 34(3) of Regulation No 44/2001 does not apply, if recognition and enforcement of a judgment of another Member State would be contrary to domestic public policy on the grounds that it would violate the principle of res judicata by reason of a prior domestic arbitration award or a prior judgment entered in the terms of the award granted by the court of the Member State in which recognition is sought, is it permissible to rely on Article 34(1) of Regulation No 44/2001 as a ground of refusing recognition or enforcement or do Articles 34(3) and (4) of the Regulation provide the exhaustive grounds by which res judicata and/or irreconcilability can prevent recognition and enforcement of a Regulation judgment?
               
            
         (1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001, L 12, p. 1)