Horst Ludwig Martin Hoffmann v Adelheid Krieg. (Convention On Jurisdiction And The Enforcement Of Judgments ) [1988] EUECJ R-145/86 (4 February 1988)

Horst Ludwig Martin Hoffmann v Adelheid Krieg. (Convention On Jurisdiction And The Enforcement Of Judgments ) [1988] EUECJ R-145/86 (4 February 1988)

A foreign judgment recognized under Article 26 must have the same effects in the enforcing state as in the state of origin, but enforcement must cease if, under the law of the enforcing state, it is no longer enforceable for reasons outside the Convention. A foreign maintenance order is irreconcilable with a subsequent national divorce decree under Article 27(3). Article 36 precludes arguments at execution stage that could have been raised in appeal against enforcement, and this rule must be applied by courts of their own motion, except where it would require making the effects of a national judgment conditional on its recognition in the state of origin.

Citation
[1988] EUECJ R-145/86
Parties
Applicant: H.L.M. Hoffman; Respondent: A. Krieg
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
04 February 1988
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Reference / Preliminary Ruling
Outcome
preliminary ruling issued
Legal Topics
Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments, Maintenance Orders, Divorce, Public Policy, Irreconcilability of Judgments
Private International Law Civil Procedure Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Maintenance Orders Divorce Public Policy Irreconcilability of Judgments

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

H.L.M. Hoffman

Applicant

A. Krieg

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Preliminary Reference / Preliminary Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a foreign judgment recognized under Article 26 of the Brussels Convention must have the same effects in the enforcing state as in the state of origin
  2. 2 Whether enforcement must continue if the judgment remains enforceable in the state of origin but ceases to be enforceable in the enforcing state for reasons outside the Convention
  3. 3 Whether a foreign maintenance order is irreconcilable with a subsequent national divorce decree under Article 27(3)

Ratio Decidendi

A foreign judgment recognized under Article 26 must have the same effects in the enforcing state as in the state of origin, but enforcement must cease if, under the law of the enforcing state, it is no longer enforceable for reasons outside the Convention. A foreign maintenance order is irreconcilable with a subsequent national divorce decree under Article 27(3). Article 36 precludes arguments at execution stage that could have been raised in appeal against enforcement, and this rule must be applied by courts of their own motion, except where it would require making the effects of a national judgment conditional on its recognition in the state of origin.

Court Disposition

preliminary ruling issued

Orders

  • A foreign judgment recognized under Article 26 must have the same effects in the enforcing state as in the state of origin.
  • Enforcement must cease if, under the law of the enforcing state, the judgment is no longer enforceable for reasons outside the Convention.