Violation of Public Policy as a Ground for Non-Recognition of Foreign Judgments – The Case of Judgments Preceded by a Mareva-Type Freezing Order

P. Franzina
{"title":"Violation of Public Policy as a Ground for Non-Recognition of Foreign Judgments – The Case of Judgments Preceded by a Mareva-Type Freezing Order","authors":"P. Franzina","doi":"10.1163/27725650-02010007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This note examines a ruling by the Corte di Cassazione concerning procedural public policy as a ground for non-recognition of foreign judgments. The Corte di Cassazione held that a foreign judgment may not be denied recognition in Italy on the sole ground that the court of origin previously granted an in personam interim measure restraining the respondent from dealing with its assets, whereas, under Italian law, asset preservation measures necessarily operate in rem. According to the Court, the public policy defence can only succeed if the proceedings before the court of origin, considered as a whole, were tainted by a serious violation of fundamental procedural rights. Having found no evidence of such a violation in the circumstances, the Court concluded that the foreign judgment concerned was eligible for recognition. The ruling of the Corte di Cassazione confirms of the restrictive approach to public policy which the Court itself developed throughout its previous case law, and will plausibly serve as a model for future decisions regarding procedural public policy.","PeriodicalId":275877,"journal":{"name":"The Italian Review of International and Comparative Law","volume":"136 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Italian Review of International and Comparative Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/27725650-02010007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This note examines a ruling by the Corte di Cassazione concerning procedural public policy as a ground for non-recognition of foreign judgments. The Corte di Cassazione held that a foreign judgment may not be denied recognition in Italy on the sole ground that the court of origin previously granted an in personam interim measure restraining the respondent from dealing with its assets, whereas, under Italian law, asset preservation measures necessarily operate in rem. According to the Court, the public policy defence can only succeed if the proceedings before the court of origin, considered as a whole, were tainted by a serious violation of fundamental procedural rights. Having found no evidence of such a violation in the circumstances, the Court concluded that the foreign judgment concerned was eligible for recognition. The ruling of the Corte di Cassazione confirms of the restrictive approach to public policy which the Court itself developed throughout its previous case law, and will plausibly serve as a model for future decisions regarding procedural public policy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不承认外国判决的理由是违反公共政策——以马雷瓦式冻结令为例
本说明审查卡萨齐奥尼法院关于程序性公共政策的一项裁决,作为不承认外国判决的理由。Cassazione法院认为,不能仅以原讼法庭先前批准了一项对人临时措施,限制被申请人处理其资产为唯一理由而拒绝承认外国判决,而根据意大利法律,资产保全措施必须以对物方式运作。法院认为,公共政策辩护只有在原讼法庭的诉讼作为一个整体考虑时才能成功,受到严重侵犯基本程序权利的玷污。由于在这种情况下没有发现这种违反的证据,法院的结论是,有关的外国判决有资格得到承认。卡萨齐奥尼最高法院的裁决确认了法院本身在其以往判例法中发展起来的对公共政策的限制性做法,并有可能成为今后有关程序性公共政策的裁决的典范。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Victim Status of Individuals in Climate Change Litigation before the ECtHR State Immunity from Civil Jurisdiction in Transboundary Environmental Litigations The Deterrent Effect of Financial Sanctions Pursuant to Article 260(2) tfeu in the Context of Violations of Environmental Obligations Authorisations to Emit Greenhouse Gases – A Conflict-of-Laws Perspective Upholding Maritime Migrants’ Rights at the Borders of Europe – J.A. and Others v. Italy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1