On 1 July 2025, the Hague Convention of 2 July 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (Hague Judgments Convention 2019) entered into force in the United Kingdom (UK). For businesses engaged in economic activity between the UK and the European Union (EU), this closes a post-Brexit regulatory gap. The Convention’s uniform framework promises greater legal certainty and more time- and cost-efficient recognition and enforcement of court rulings on both sides of the English Channel. This article outlines the key provisions of the Hague Judgments Convention 2019, explains its implementation in the UK and Germany, and highlights what businesses should consider in practice.
What does the Hague Judgments Convention 2019 cover?
The Hague Judgments Convention 2019 lays down the prerequisites under which court rulings in civil and commercial matters of one contracting state are recognized and declared enforceable in other contracting states. In addition to the UK and the EU member states (with the exception of Denmark), current contracting states include Ukraine and Uruguay. In relation to the UK, the Hague Judgments Convention 2019 only applies to proceedings initiated after 1 July 2025.
Unlike the Brussels Ibis Regulation that applied in the UK before Brexit, the Hague Judgments Convention 2019 contains neither rules on international jurisdiction nor provisions for coordinating parallel court proceedings. In relations between the EU and the UK, these aspects continue to be governed by the respective national law of the court seized.
In addition to the Hague Judgments Convention 2019, the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements of 30 June 2005 (Hague Choice of Court Convention 2005) applies in relation to the UK. Where parties have concluded an exclusive choice of court agreement within the meaning of the Hague Choice of Court Convention 2005, that Convention takes precedence over the Hague Judgments Convention 2019 for the cross-border recognition and enforcement of a ruling rendered by a designated court. By contrast, where there is no jurisdiction clause, only a non-exclusive clause, or, as is common in financing agreements, an asymmetric jurisdiction clause, the Hague Judgments Convention 2019 governs recognition and enforcement between EU member states and the UK.
Which court rulings benefit from the Hague Judgments Convention 2019?
The Hague Judgments Convention 2019 applies to rulings in civil and commercial matters. Rulings arising from acts of a state in the exercise of its sovereign powers are excluded from the Convention’s scope.
The Hague Judgments Convention 2019 covers judgments on the merits (Art. 1b). These include, in particular, judgments on claims for payment or for performance of non-monetary obligations, default judgments, judgments in class actions, and cost orders relating to rulings covered by the Convention. The Hague Judgments Convention 2019 also extends to enforcement orders issued after service of a default summons where the defendant has not responded, as well as to interim orders that require performance. The Convention does not apply to purely procedural rulings (e.g., orders for disclosure of documents), to rulings on the recognition and enforcement of a foreign judgment or arbitral award, or to provisional enforcement measures (e.g., attachment orders). Provisional or protective measures intended solely to secure assets or preserve the status quo are not “judgments” within the meaning of the Hague Judgments Convention 2019 [Art. 3(1)(b)].
A prerequisite for application of the Hague Judgments Convention 2019 is that a judgement is effective and enforceable in the state of origin [Art. 4(3)]. Formal legal force is not required. However, if the ruling is subject to judicial review in the state of origin, or if the time limit for an ordinary appeal has not expired, recognition or enforcement may be refused or postponed [Art. 4(4)].
Art. 2 of the Hague Judgments Convention 2019 lists matters excluded from the Convention’s scope. The most important exclusions are:
- Insolvency, insolvency arrangements and similar matters [Art. 2(1)(e)]: This exclusion covers court rulings on rights and obligations that arise under provisions specifically applicable to insolvency or comparable collective proceedings, rather than under general civil or commercial law. An insolvency arrangement includes agreements for the restructuring of companies to avert liquidation concluded between debtors and creditors in the context of special proceedings.
- Intellectual property [Art. 2(1)(m)]: Matters recognized internationally or nationally as intellectual property or afforded equivalent protection are excluded. This includes, in particular, rulings on the validity and registration of intellectual property rights, as well as on the existence and infringement of copyright and related rights. By contrast, the Hague Judgments Convention 2019 covers rulings based on general contract law, for example claims concerning incorrect reporting of sales under distribution agreements or the calculation of license fees under trademark license agreements.
- Antitrust matters, except for decisions concerning so-called “hardcore cartels” [Art. 2(1)(p)]: Competition law matters are only partially excluded from the scope of the Hague Judgments Convention 2019. The Convention applies to rulings regarding agreements and concerted practices between competitors, where both the conduct and its effects occurred in the state of origin. By contrast, prohibitions and restrictions addressing unilateral conduct by market participants (e.g., due to abuse of a dominant market position) fall outside the Convention’s scope.
- Arbitration and related state proceedings [Art. 2(3)]: Court rulings concerning the recognition, enforcement, or setting aside of arbitral awards, as well as default judgments in which the court of origin did not address an existing arbitration agreement, are excluded from the Hague Judgments Convention 2019. However, if the defendant appeared in the proceedings before the court of origin without invoking the arbitration agreement, resulting court rulings fall within the Convention’s scope.
The exclusions from the scope of application of the Hague Judgments Convention 2019 do not apply where an excluded matter arises only as a preliminary question or as an objection in the proceedings [Art. 2(2)].
What are the requirements for recognition and enforcement under the Hague Judgments Convention 2019?
In addition to falling within the Convention’s scope, the recognition and enforcement of a court ruling under the Hague Judgments Convention 2019 require that at least one ground for jurisdiction in Art. 5 is satisfied. These grounds fall into three categories:
- the defendant’s habitual residence in the state of origin or, where the claim arises from the activities of a branch, agency, or other establishment, the place of business in the state of origin,
- the defendant’s express consent to the jurisdiction of a court in the state of origin or submission on the merits without contesting the jurisdiction,
- a sufficient connection between the claim in dispute and the state of origin.
Pursuant to Art. 12 of the Hague Judgments Convention 2019, the following documents must be submitted for recognition and enforcement:
a certified copy of the judgment, including proof of its validity and, where applicable, enforceability, - where necessary, a certified translation of the decision and any accompanying documents into an official language of the requested contracting state.
The standard of review in proceedings for recognition and enforcement under the Hague Judgments Convention 2019 is confined to the following issues:
- Is the ruling within the scope of application of the Convention?
- Does at least one basis for jurisdiction under Art. 5 apply?
- Do any grounds for refusal under Art. 7 apply? The exhaustive list in Art. 7 must be interpreted narrowly. Grounds for refusal include, for example, a violation of the defendant’s right to be heard, a violation of public policy, and a conflict with another court ruling. A review of the substance of the decision is expressly prohibited [Art. 4(2)].
Procedural matters not expressly governed by the Hague Judgments Convention 2019 are determined by the national law of the requested contracting state:
- In Germany, recognition and enforcement proceedings are governed by the Act on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (AVAG). Jurisdiction lies with the regional court (Landgericht) at the debtor’s place of habitual residence, otherwise with the court at the place of enforcement (§ 3 AVAG). The procedure is generally conducted in writing and, as a rule, without hearing the debtor (§ 6 AVAG). If enforcement is granted, the judgment is endorsed with an enforcement clause, and – where necessary – the operative part is translated into German.
- In the UK, proceedings are governed by the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 (CJJA). Jurisdiction lies with the High Court in England & Wales, the Court of Session in Scotland, or the High Court in Northern Ireland [§ 4C (2) CJJA]. There is no requirement for an oral hearing of the debtor [§ 4 (4) CJJA]. In addition, a certified copy of the judgment is treated as authentic unless there are reasonable grounds to doubt its authenticity [§ 11C (1) (a) CJJA].
Practical implications for businesses
The Hague Judgments Convention 2019 enhances legal certainty for a wide array of contractual and non-contractual B2B and B2C disputes by providing a uniform framework for the cross-border recognition and enforcement of court rulings between the EU and the UK.
Businesses operating internationally should, in particular, take note of the following practical points:
- facilitated cross-border recognition and enforcement under the Hague Judgments Convention 2019 can, in individual cases, be leveraged to exert pressure on debtors to voluntarily comply with their obligations without incurring additional procedural costs;
- within the scope of the Convention, plaintiffs or applicants domiciled in the UK cannot be required to provide security for legal costs in German court proceedings under § 110 (1) German Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO);
- when negotiating contracts, parties choosing between asymmetric jurisdiction clauses and arbitration should evaluate – having regard to the scope of application of the Hague Judgments Convention 2019 – whether state court litigation may offer a more time- and cost-efficient path for potential future disputes out of or in connection with the contract.
