Third-party funded project: Diversity of Enforcement titles in cross-border debt collection in the EU

The Project: EU-En4s

Cross-border commercial transactions within the EU still suffer from significant inefficiency when disputes arise during the transaction process. To make dispute resolution or prevention more efficient for such transactions, expanding cross-border commercial transactions must be accompanied by an accelerated import system for foreign court decisions as well as efficient enforcement mechanisms. Therefore, the En4s project aims to analyze the recognition and enforcement system of Regulation (EU) No. 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (Brussels I Regulation) for remaining obstacles. The Brussels I Regulation has created a system across Europe with the aim of a unified legal internal market and the free circulation of court decisions. In particular, the abolition of the exequatur procedure during the introduction of the Brussels I Regulation has contributed to this unification and strengthened mutual trust. However, the application of the Brussels I Regulation still faces problems because the regulation itself only sets the general framework for recognition and enforcement, while enforcement continues to be subject to the law of the respective member state. The same applies to the titles that are the subject of recognition and enforcement. These diversities pose obstacles to the intended goal of mutual trust and counteract the desired circulation of judgments in civil and commercial matters.

Research Objectives

The aim of the project is to determine, based on previous studies, which aspects of diversity in recognition and enforcement are capable of counteracting the overarching goal of mutual trust in cross-border enforcement. The project focuses on the judgments themselves. It seeks to identify similarities and differences in the structure, framework, effects of judgments in the heterogeneous national procedural systems, etc. The findings are intended to be used, on the one hand, for proposals on how the regime of the Brussels I Regulation can be improved in the future. On the other hand, tools are to be developed from the findings that enable national practitioners to overcome terminological and conceptual differences when dealing with judgments across borders.