Enforcement of foreign judgments in Europe

Mainstream

Enforcement of a foreign judgment in Europe is not a bureaucratic formality after a winning dispute. It is an independent strategic operation.

The question is not whether you have a solution on paper. The main question is whether it is possible to convert this document into real assets in the European territory.

Effective execution in Europe begins with three checks:

1. In which country is the asset or debtor located?
2. What international legal regime governs the recognition of your decision.
3. What grounds for refusal can the debtor use to block the process?

If these three issues are not analyzed before applying for recognition, the lender risks losing time, money and the effect of surprise.

When the decision is needed in Europe

Execution of a foreign judgment in Europe is necessary if:

• your EU counterparty does not voluntarily enforce a non-EU court decision;
• the debtor’s assets (cash, real estate, business interests) are located in Germany, Austria, France, the Netherlands or other European jurisdiction;
• Your debtor’s receivables are tied to a European bank.
• the goods are seized in a European port or in a transit warehouse;
• the debtor must be blocked from receiving payments from its customers in the EU;
• After successful arbitration or court, the debtor transfers the assets to a European safe haven.
• the dispute is related to the sanctioned assets or their unblocking;
• You plan to execute the decision from the USA, England and Wales (after Brexit), the UAE, the CIS or Asia in the EU.

The mistake most creditors make

Many companies start the process with the thought:

We won the trial, now we just have to take the decision to a local bailiff in Europe.

That's the wrong first step.

The right question is:

“Does a particular European country recognize my decision without reviewing the merits of the case and what vulnerabilities does the debtor see in it?”

Sometimes the best result is not an immediate application for recognition, but a preliminary arrest of assets. Sometimes – use of the simplified regime Brussels Ia (if the decision is from an EU country). Sometimes there is a parallel initiation of production in several EU countries. Sometimes, the initiation of negotiations on a settlement agreement immediately after the account is frozen.

Executing foreign decisions in Europe requires not procedural enthusiasm, but precision cross-border engineering.

Step 1. Determine the legal regime of recognition

The first thing to consider is not the writ of execution, but the applicable international treaty or regulation. The depth of the local court’s review of the decision depends on this.

Key legal regimes in Europe:

• Brussels I bis (Recast) 1215/2012. The most effective tool. It is between EU countries. Cancels the exequatur procedure. A court decision of one EU country is recognized and enforced in another almost automatically, without a separate judicial decision on recognition. The grounds for refusal are strictly limited.
• The 2007 Luhansk Convention. It regulates relations between the EU countries and Iceland, Norway, Switzerland. The procedure is simplified, but exequatur is formally preserved.
• The Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments 2019 New global instrument (ratified by the EU and, for example, Ukraine) It opens up the possibility of recognition of decisions from non-EU countries without a bilateral treaty. It is important for decisions from countries that have ratified it.
• National legislation. If none of the above instruments are applicable (e.g. a decision from a non-EU country not party to the 2019 Hague Convention), the autonomous law of a particular European country applies. Here, the requirements for reciprocity and public policy are analyzed more rigorously.

If you try to enforce a decision outside the EU under Brussels rules, that is a fatal mistake. And vice versa: Ignoring the 2019 Hague Convention for the sake of a complex national regime is a lost profit.

Step 2. Collect a package of documents for recognition

For a European court or bailiff, not notarized translations of correspondence are important, but a strictly defined set of documents.

We need to prepare:

• a certified copy of the judgment;
• Certificate in the form of Annex I to the Brussels Regulations (if applicable);
• confirmation of delivery of the statement of claim to the debtor (the document causing the greatest number of disputes);
• proof of the entry into force of the decision and its enforceability in the country of origin;
• certified translation of the decision and key documents into the official language of the country of execution;
• Power of attorney for local lawyers.

Particularly dangerous are defects in the notification of the process. The European courts are extremely scrupulous in protecting the defendant’s right to defense. If the debtor has not been notified properly and in time to prepare the defence, recognition will be refused, even if the position on the merits of the dispute is brilliant.

Step 3. Check whether there are grounds for refusal

Even within the liberal Brussels regime, there is a narrow but important list of grounds for refusing recognition.

This has an impact on:

• Selection of the country for execution;
• forecasting the behavior of the debtor;
• The necessity of immediate imposition of interim measures.

Key grounds for refusal:

• A clear contradiction to the public policy (ordre public) of the country of execution. For example, a decision is made in gross violation of procedural rights or contrary to the fundamental principles of European law (including the EU sanctions regime).
• Inappropriate notification of the defendant. If the claim was formally filed, but the defendant could not objectively learn about the process and defend himself.
• Incompatible with another solution. If there is already a judgment of the court of the country of enforcement or an acknowledged decision from a third country between the same parties and on the same subject matter.
• Violation of exclusive competence. For example, if a foreign court has resolved a dispute over the rights to real estate in Germany or the validity of an entry in the register of companies in Austria that fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of these countries.

The error at this stage leads to the rejection of the application and recovery of legal costs from the plaintiff.

Step 4. Select Execution Jurisdiction and Find Asset Tracing

In Europe, you can’t just “execute the decision in the EU.” You need to know exactly in which bank, in which city, on which account the debtor's money lies.

Jurisdiction should be chosen not by the convenience of the court, but by the location of the assets:

• Bank accounts. Before applying for recognition, a bank tracing must be conducted through local lawyers and specialized databases. In some EU jurisdictions, partial access to account information is possible through bailiffs at the enforcement stage.
• Real estate. Public registers (Grundbuch in Germany, Land Register in England, Kadaster in the Netherlands) allow you to quickly establish the owner.
• Shares and shares in companies. Trade registers reveal the structure of business ownership.
• Goods and receivables. Arresting a product in a warehouse or claims against a European customer is often the quickest way to get money.

To gain recognition against an empty European shelf is a commercial fiasco. The asset search strategy must be ready before the debtor is aware of the start of the European recognition process.

Step 5. Consider interim measures at the recognition stage

It's the most underrated tool.

European regulations and national laws allow for the request for interim measures even before the formal recognition procedure (exequation or registration) has been completed.

These measures may include:

• European Account Preservation Order (EAPO) – European Order for the Preservation of Bank Accounts in Cross-Border Matters
• freezing orders on assets;
• prohibition of alienation of shares in the company;
• making a record of the litigation in the real estate register;
• Prohibition of payments to third parties.

Interim measures are critical if the debtor:

• has a history of rapid withdrawals;
• is a holding structure without operating activities;
• is under the management of nominee directors;
• shows signs of insolvency;
• Do business in high-risk jurisdictions outside the EU.

EAPO allows you to freeze funds in the accounts of the debtor in the EU member states (except Denmark) without prior notice to the debtor. This is more effective than trying to negotiate with only an unrecognized solution.

Step 6. Initiate recognition and enforcement procedures

After the analysis of the regime, assets and the imposition of interim measures, the formal stage begins.

Scenario A: The decision from another EU country (Brussels I bis) is cancelled. The creditor shall directly contact the bailiff (huissier, Gerichtsvollzieher) in the country of execution with a certified copy of the decision and a certificate in the form of Annex I. The debtor can file an objection after the commencement of enforcement actions, which makes this regime extremely aggressive and effective for the creditor.

Scenario B: Decision from a member state of the Luhansk Convention or a third country.A formal application for recognition and declaration of enforceable decision (exequature) is submitted to the competent court. The court shall examine whether there are grounds for refusal, but shall not review the decision on the merits. The decision is usually made in an adversarial manner.

In international performance, speed and confidentiality are especially important. Leaked information on filing an application gives the debtor time to withdraw assets.

Step 7. Execution of the decision

A recognized solution is the key. The execution is a door that must be opened.

This may include:

• seizure of funds in accounts;
• Seizure and sale of movable property;
• foreclosure of real estate;
• assignment of receivables to the creditor;
• enforcement through the bailiff service;
• interaction with the insolvency administrator if the debtor is in bankruptcy;
• Structured settlement negotiations after the assets are seized.

In practice, the stage of physical receipt of money is often more important than judicial recognition. This is where the lender understands whether its cross-border strategy has been commercially successful or only academically interesting.

EU vs Third Country Decision: tactician

The choice of tactics does not depend on the nationality of the plaintiff, but on the origin of the decision and the location of the assets.

How to strengthen your position before a dispute arises

The best execution of a foreign decision is planned when signing the contract.

An international commercial contract with a European element should include:

• A clear arbitration clause (arbitration decisions are still easier to enforce globally than state court decisions, thanks to the New York Convention)
• the applicable law of a country with predictable judicial practice;
• provision on the language of arbitration or court, which coincides with the language of the main documents;
• a condition for the express and unconditional recognition of jurisdiction and the waiver of objections to performance (to the extent permitted by law);
• a bank guarantee or letter of credit subject to European law;
• the condition that assets in the EU are a security interest;
• the location of the assets or the European representation for the purposes of correspondence;
• retention of title in force in European jurisdiction.

The contract should not be designed for a perfect partnership, but for a recovery scenario in Europe.

Common Errors in Execution in Europe

1. The decision is accepted to execute without prior asset tracing, but the debtor is an empty GmbH with zero balance.

2. A decision made under a law contrary to EU sanctions will not be enforced in any country of the Union.

3. To believe that the decision of the English court after Brexit continues to operate in the EU, as before the Brussels regime is no longer applied. The enforcement of judgments in England and Wales in the EU is now governed by national law or the 2005 Hague Convention (on the choice of court), if applicable, but not automatically.

4. The New York Convention and Brussels I bis are two fundamentally different tracks. Trying to enforce an arbitral award through a judicial procedure is a grave mistake.

5. While you wait, the debtor calmly withdraws funds through SEPA payment to another EU country.

6. The term for enforcement may be determined both by the law of the country of origin of the decision and by the law of the country of execution.

7. Do not translate key decisions into German or French Judges and bailiffs must understand what they are executing. A poor translation is a reason for the debtor to delay the process.

Creditor checklist

Before the start of execution in Europe, 15 questions must be answered:

1. Where exactly are the debtor’s assets located?
2. Which country is the decision made (EU, EFTA, third country)?
3. Does Brussels I bis, the Luhansk Convention, the Hague Convention, or only national law apply?
4. Has the judgment been enforceable and is it enforceable at the place of issue?
5. Was the debtor notified of the process in a manner recognised in Europe?
6. Does the decision not violate the exclusive competence of the courts of the country of enforcement?
7. Is the decision in conflict with the European ordre public (including the sanctions regime)?
8. Is the time limit for enforcement expired?
9. What form of certificate or court order is needed for a local bailiff?
10. Can the European Account Preservation Order (EAPO) be applied before the cards are disclosed?
11. In which bank and in which country is the debtor’s account opened?
12. Does the debtor have other accounts receivable in the EU that can be recovered?
13. Do I need a court translation of documents and a deposit to start the process?
14. What is the case law of a particular court for similar applications?
15. What scenario will give maximum pressure: Arrest of an account in Germany, shares in the Netherlands or real estate in France?

What a strong execution strategy looks like in Europe

A strong strategy usually involves five parallel tracks:

1. Asset Mapping & Tracing – Identification of all tangible and intangible assets in the EU. Definition of banks, debtor counterparties and chains of ownership.

2. Legal Framework Analysis The exact qualification of the legal regime (Brussels I bis, Luhansk Convention, Hague Convention 2005 or 2019, or national law). Assessment of the risks of denial of recognition.

3. Pre-Judgment/Pre-Recognition Freezing Immediate seizure using EAPO or local security mechanisms before the debtor becomes aware of the commencement of the process.

4. Formal Recognition Preparation and submission of a perfectly arranged package of documents to the court for exequatur or obtaining direct access to enforcement proceedings.

5. Enforcement Execution: Working with bailiffs, seizing assets, converting them into cash and transboundaryly transferring the recovered amounts to the client.

Without the first and second tracks, the fifth will never come.

FAQ

Can the Russian decision be implemented in Germany?

Yeah, it's possible in principle. In the absence of a bilateral treaty, German autonomous law applies. It is necessary to prove the reciprocity and absence of a violation of the German public order. The process is more complicated than for EU decisions, but it is real.

What is the European Account Preservation Order (EAPO)?

This is a mechanism that allows a creditor in a cross-border case in the EU to freeze the debtor’s funds in a bank account in one EU country without prior notice to the latter. The tool is very fast and effective, especially at the beginning of the foreclosure campaign.

How did Brexit affect the execution of British decisions?

English decisions rendered after 31 December 2020 are no longer subject to the Brussels I bis regime. Their enforcement in the EU is now governed by each country's national law or the 2005 Hague Choice of Court Convention, but not automatically. This has made the process much more complicated.

What to do if the debtor declares bankruptcy in Europe?

Enforcement proceedings are usually suspended. You must file your claims in a bankruptcy proceeding under the European Insolvency Regulation 2015/848. The claim must be based on a foreign decision or documents proving the debt.

Can you recover legal costs incurred in Europe?

Yes, in most cases, the costs of lawyers and court fees in the country of enforcement are also recoverable from the debtor as part of the enforcement proceedings, if their amount is reasonable and documented.

More importantly: Quickly get recognition or unobtrusively find assets?

For the final result, it is more important to find and freeze assets invisibly. A recognized decision without an asset being seized is an expensive souvenir.

Related services

• International Arbitration, Commercial Litigation & Cross-Border Disputes
• Asset Tracing, Freezing Orders & Offshore Asset Recovery
• Sanctions, Export Controls & International Compliance
• European Insolvency, Restructuring & Creditor Protection
• Commercial Contracts

Related material

• How to recover debt under an international commercial contract
• Asset tracing: How to find debtor assets in Europe
• Interim measures in international commercial disputes
• Recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards in Europe
• International arbitration: When it is more effective than the court
• European Order for the Preservation of Bank Accounts (EAPO)
• Sanctions and blocking measures: How to Protect Assets
• How to check a foreign counterparty before concluding a contract

Conclusion

The enforcement of a foreign judgment in Europe requires not a desk-level knowledge of regulations, but a strategy of preemptive strike.

Success is based on early identification of assets, precise definition of the applicable legal regime, sudden application of interim measures and flawless procedural processing of documents.

Cross-border disputes are not won by the loudest voices of abuse. The winner is the one who methodically blocks the debtor’s liquidity and turns the court act into real cash flow in the European banking system.