Abolishing exequatur in the Brussels I regulation (recast) while safeguarding debtor's rights

Abstract

Following the recent trend in the European judicial area of making cross-border enforcement of judgments a more efficient procedure, the European Commission issued a Proposal for a Recast of the Brussels I Regulation in 2010. Among the principal amendments in relation to the cross-border enforcement of judgments, the Commission proposed the abolition of exequatur for most types of judgments and also most safeguards for challenging enforcement. This Thesis examines both the Commission Proposal and final Regulation on a Brussels I Regulation (Recast) from the point of view of making cross-border enforcement of judgments more efficient, while ensuring utmost respect for the rights of defence and Member States’ sensitivities. This Thesis argues that a preliminary distinction needs to be made between abolishing exequatur and removing the grounds for non-enforcement; abolition of the former does not entail removal of the latter. It concludes that the abolition of intermediate procedures is a laudable aim which furthers the creditor’s right to a fair trial without leaving negative implications on the rights of defence. Making all types of judgments automatically enforceable across the European judicial area also ensures simplicity and hence the approach in Regulation 1215/2012 is a welcome step forward. However this Thesis argues that this may not be achieved without due respect for the rights of defence. In this respect the Commission Proposal would have resulted in a diminution of such rights behind the premise of mutual trust and free movement of judgments. This Thesis concludes that Regulation 1215/2012 ensures protection for the rights of defence and respect for Member States’ sensitivities and is hence a welcome step forward. Some minor improvements are however still necessary, as will be examined throughout this thesis.