Earlier we’ve blogged about the role of professional document translation and legal translations and court translations in enforcing U.S. judgments in Europe. Although in general legalese the concept of enforcing a judgment and executing a judgment is viewed as one and the same, this is not often the case when it is applied in the arena of international law. As clearly defined by the Convention of the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States (CSID), an enforcement of a judgment is used within the territory of each signing party, whereas an execution on a judgment is governed by the laws of the jurisdiction where the execution is to be made (Article 54).
In other words, a party signing to the obligatory note can enforce a judgment on the note within either of the party’s home states and may act to execute the judgment in the state where the action on the obligatory note is being brought. Although these places are often the same, this is not always the case. And this distinction matters when the issue of sovereign immunity arises.
To ensure a proper action is brought in the proper state and thus preserves sovereign immunity, it is essential both the obligatory note and the action are properly drafted and filed. This typically means filing both the document and the action in both the jurisdiction the execution is being made and the courts of the states where enforcement may be brought. Further, in doing so, all documents should contain a foreign language translation, and both the original and the foreign language translation should be filed in all jurisdictions.