Hague Choice of Court Convention
2005 treaty on private international law
- 2 min read
- 2 chapters
Explore on Lably
ToursExplore Lably’s 3D toursParties under the convention recognize a choice of court agreement between parties in the field of civil law and thus courts not chosen in the agreement will stay all proceedings, unless the chosen court refuses to uphold the jurisdiction. For the convention choice of court agreements must be "exclusive", which means in the context of the convention that also a group of courts may be chosen, as long as they are in the same country. It is not required for a choice of court agreement to explicitly state that the agreement is exclusive; designating a specific (set of) courts will automatically render it exclusive.
Judgments by the chosen court must be recognized in all states where the convention is applicable.
History
The Hague Conference started with the "Judgements project" in 1996: the development of a convention regarding jurisdiction and recognition of judgements. Jurisdiction within such a convention would be classified in three categories: bases of jurisdiction which were obligatory, optional or prohibited. As the negotiators were not able to come to a consensus on such a convention, the scope of the work was reduced to jurisdiction and recognition of decisions based on a choice of court agreement between the parties. During the negotiations parallels were drawn between the New York Convention on arbitral awards: the aim was to create a system of recognition of decisions based on court cases where the court was chosen pursuant to a choice of court agreements, which would create the same level of predictability and enforceability as is the case in arbitral awards in New York Convention states.
Sign in to keep reading
One more chapter is free with a Lably account.

