Article 22 Mutual Declarations on the non-exclusive choice of judicial arrangements A court in a contracting state other than that of the chosen jurisdiction suspends proceedings to which an exclusive court agreement applies, unless the Hague Convention on the Choice of Judicial Arrangements essentially establishes the exclusive jurisdiction of a court of a contracting state whose jurisdiction is the subject of an exclusive for election agreement which has been concluded, for the most part, under the Convention. This exclusive jurisdiction must be respected by the other jurisdictions of the contracting states. The New York Convention contains two fundamental provisions. The first provides that “each state party recognizes a written agreement under which the parties undertake to submit to arbitration all or any difference.” The second states that “each State party recognizes and passes the arbitral awards as a matter of faith.” In practice, where the parties agree to settle their dispute through arbitration, the subsequent award is almost universally applicable. When a party decides to ignore the arbitration agreement or avoid the consequences of the award, the party concerned may also ask the court of the contracting state to refer the parties to arbitration proceedings and/or apply the award (Articles 2 and 3). The Hague Convention on the Choice of Judicial Agreements contains similar provisions concerning the recognition of the choice of judicial agreements and the judgments rendered by those courts. The Hague Convention on court choice creates a certain uniformity of the rules relating to the jurisdiction of the courts and the recognition and enforcement of court decisions. Recognition and enforcement are, in principle, facilitated on the basis of the HCCCA because, on the one hand, the reciprocity requirement under Section 328 of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO) no longer applies. On the other hand, the refusal to recognize or enforce a foreign judgment is limited. In addition, legal certainty will be strengthened with regard to the validity and applicability of exclusive court decisions in the international context. The HCCCA is catching up with something that has been in place since 1958 in arbitration with the New York Convention. 1.
Recognition or enforcement of a judgment may be denied if and to the extent that the judgment inflicts damages, including exemplary or punishable damages, which do not compensate a party for the loss or injury suffered. 2. The court hearing takes into account the question of whether and to what extent the harm awarded by the original court is used to cover the costs and costs of the proceedings. (a) to which a natural person acting primarily for personal, family or domestic (consumer) purposes is a supporter; (b) with respect to employment contracts, including collective agreements. In any event, the european Parliament and Council`s 12 December 2012 revision of the European Parliament and Council Regulation 12 December 2012 on judicial competence, recognition and enforcement of civil and commercial decisions (Brussels Regulation I) of 10 January 2015 (see here for consideration of the brussels I regulation) has in any case an essential scope of application.