GERMANY Trends and Developments Contributed by: Kevin B. Villwock and Niklas Melljes, BridgehouseLaw Germany
Introduction Recognition of international judgments in Germany Globalisation has transformed civil and commercial litigation. Businesses increasingly operate across bor - ders, digital services are provided worldwide, and par - ties frequently hold assets in multiple jurisdictions. As a result, judgments rendered in one country frequently need to be recognised and enforced in another coun - try in order to produce practical effects. Yet the cross-border recognition of judgments remains one of the most challenging areas of private international law. While legal disputes have become increasingly international, judicial authority remains fundamentally territorial. Each state maintains its own procedural rules and public policy standards, creat - ing significant obstacles to the circulation of foreign judgments. Within the European Union, these challenges have largely been addressed through an extensive frame - work of harmonised rules based on the principle of mutual trust. Outside the EU, however, recognition fre - quently depends on international conventions, bilater - al agreements, or domestic law, often requiring courts to balance international legal co-operation against the protection of fundamental procedural safeguards. Recent developments, including the modernisation of Germany’s procedural framework through the AVAG, the growing importance of digital proceedings, and increasing recognition requests involving judgments from non-EU jurisdictions, have further heightened the practical relevance of this area of law. This article examines the legal framework governing the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in Germany, with particular emphasis on the distinc - tion between intra-EU recognition and the treatment of judgments originating from third countries, espe - cially the United States. Sources of Law In 2012, the European Union adopted Regulation (EU) No. 1215/2012, commonly referred to as the Brussels Ia Regulation. This Regulation constitutes the primary legal instrument governing international jurisdiction as
well as the recognition and enforcement of judgments within the European Union. The primacy of EU law, originally established by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Cos- ta v ENEL (1964), was reaffirmed in the recent decision BSH Hausgeräte GmbH v Electrolux AB of 25 February 2025. The case concerned a patent dispute involving patents registered in both EU and non-EU countries. Pursuant to Article 24 (4) of the Brussels Ia Regula - tion, proceedings concerning the registration or valid - ity of patents fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the state in which the patent is registered. The question arose whether this exclusive jurisdiction also applies where patent invalidity is raised merely as a defence in infringement proceedings. The CJEU held that the mere assertion of patent invalidity as a defence does not deprive the court seised of jurisdic - tion under the Brussels Ia Regulation. The judgment thereby reinforced the procedural effectiveness of the jurisdictional system established by the Brussels Ia Regulation. With regard to judgments originating from non-EU countries, the recognition of foreign judgments in Germany is governed by a hierarchy of legal sources. First, priority is given to applicable multilateral con - ventions, including: • the Lugano Convention on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (2007); • the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agree - ments (2005); and • the Hague Judgments Convention on the Recogni - tion and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters (2019). Second, recognition may be based on bilateral treaties concluded between Germany and individual states. Although their practical significance has diminished due to the increasing number of multilateral instru - ments, they remain relevant in specific cases. This is particularly true in relation to the United Kingdom after Brexit, as the Brussels Ia Regulation no longer gov - erns the recognition of UK judgments within the EU.
190 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook