International FamiliesMoney, Children & Long-Term Planning

CHILD SUPPORT WORKSHOP

PROGRAM PRODUCER: Ms. Rhiannon Lewis (UK)

PRESENTERS:Hannah Roots (Canada)Gary Caswell (U.S.)Margaret Campbell Haynes (U.S.)Philippe Lortie (The Hague)

*

Establishment & Enforcement AbroadRecognition & Enforcement of Foreign Orders

Speakers

Hannah RootsManaging DirectorBritish Columbia Maintenance Enforcement Program

Gary Caswell, Esq.Nuez & Caswell

*

OverviewEstablishment of a child support orderUS LawCanadian law and processesIncoming requests for establishment in United StatesEnforcement of an existing Child Support orderCanadian processesRecognition and enforcement of a foreign order in US Other IssuesDuration of child supportCurrency ConversionModification of orders

*

Establishment of Parentage & Child Support in a Foreign Country U.S. ViewIV-D Federal Level Reciprocityhttp://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cse/international/index.htmlIV-D State Level Reciprocity TX-Germany, CA-New Zealand, VA-Quebec See, OCSE Intergovernmental Referral Guide for State Level Reciprocity & Other helpful informationForms & ProceduresGive Foreign Tribunals what they want! (Documents, certificates, translation, foreign currency equivalence)UIFSA 2001 304 (b) Duties of Initiating TribunalFuture: Hague Transmittal & Country Profiles*

Establishment of Parentage & Child Support in a Foreign Country U.S. View ContdMake IV-D Agency do its job! Case Closure Criteria applicable when respondent is in a foreign country45 CFR CH.III 303.11(B)4: Can close if NCP locate unknown and have made diligent Efforts using Multiple Sources over 3 yrs via Automated Locate (if sufficient info to do Auto-Locate) & 1 yr if only have info for Non-Auto-Locate45 CFR CH.III 303.11(B)6:The NCP is a citizen of , and lives in, a foreign country, does not work for the Federal government or a company with headquarters or offices in the United States, and has no reachable domestic income or assets; and the State has been unable to establish reciprocity with the country (focus on citizenship, not Reciprocity) If US Citizen, cant close for lack of reciprocity alone.*

Establishment of Parentage & Child Support in a Foreign Country U.S. View ContdIf No Reciprocity - Long Arm FactorsIs there a Jurisdictional basis for VA to establish support or determine parentage over a Nonresident Respondent (NR)? UIFSA 2001 201 bases: NR was personally served in VA; voluntarily submits to VA Jurisdiction; resided with the child in this state; resided in the state and supported the child; the child resides in this state because of NRs acts or directives (DV cases?); sex in VA & child may have been conceived as a result; and any other basis which is constitutional.Is Enforcement of resultant Order in U.S. possible?(wage withholding, license revocation, property lien (cost & logistics of PAT);

*

Establishment of Parentage & Child Support in a Foreign Country U.S. View ContdChild vs. Debtor-Based Jurisdiction StalemateKulko, 436 U.S. 84; 98 S. Ct. 1690Spring Break Affair in Cancun; CP in TX; AF in Quebec & never in TX; No TX-QU reciprocity; QU Local Counsel says no Jurisdiction to Establish PAT in QU = Stalemate! (File in TX, Child in TX as a result of AF Acts or Directives? Ask TX IV-D to ask VA IV-D (VA QU Reciprocity to initiate to QU?) No Reciprocity + No Long Arm = Foreign Attorney(s) DOS Link for Retaining Foreign AttorneysNon-Judicial RemediesADR & Cultural Pressure (Japanese Corps, Ball Clubs)

*

MEXICO

No Federal Reciprocity (despite Fernando Solana 92 Declaration re all MX states & URESA/RURESA No Effective Central Authority AssistanceEnforcement LimitedWage Withholding (specific to employer) Abandonment Service of Process: New Developments Hague vs Inter-American; Exclusivity; PFI; Local Counsel See, Gary Caswell Judicial Assistance Conventions in Effect for Mexico and the USA in course materials.*

Canadian Family Law FrameworkIn Canada family law is area of shared responsibility for federal government and provinces/territoriesFederal law (Divorce Act ) governs family matters including child support for parents that were marriedProvincial law governs all issues arising out of family breakdown outside marriage (never married, or interim orders before divorce) and property division Enforcement of child support is exclusively a provincial responsibility (although federal government will enforce against federally regulated assets/income at request of a province) Provincial/Territorial Interjurisdictional Support Order (ISO) Acts govern cases where one party resides outside provinceISO is similar to UIFSA (but not uniform across Canada) Result is a patchwork of similar but not identical laws respecting family breakdown in Canada

*

Establishing Child Support in CanadaIn terms of substantive law there are a lot of similarities between Canadian and American family lawSome differences to be aware of:In Canada jurisdiction to establish a child support order can be based on the residence of the custodial parent and the child only (no need for NCP to have had any contact with Canada)In Canada - Paternity does not have to be specifically established before a child support order can be made. It is up to NCP to raise the issue of paternity if he wants that issue determined, otherwise the support application may proceed without consideration of paternity*

Forum Considerations :Establishment in Canada or US?ConsiderationsCost Very unlikely that legal assistance would available in Canada for establishment if CP retains local counselUse of IV-D Agency is cost-free to custodial parent Time to obtain orderDomestic US processes may be faster than Canadian process as Courts in some provinces are quite backed upA Canadian lawyer may be able to bring the application in a superior court which can be much faster than a lower court process in Canada ( Many provincial/ territorial ISO processes use lower court)Enforceability of orderAs long as US Court had jurisdiction under US law, the resulting US order can be enforced in Canada but it will still have to go through a recognition process in Canada (discussed later)An order obtained in Canada (whether through IV-D process or through local counsel) can be immediately enforced

*

Paternity EstablishmentISO legislation does not allow a stand-alone paternity determination at request of a foreign applicant it must be part of an application to establish child supportIf request to establish a child support order comes through the IV-D system and NCP challenges paternity (or CP specifically requests establishment of paternity)Designated authority will coordinate paternity testing Processes vary but genetic testing can be done by agreement or Court order

*

Child Support OrderAll Canadian child support guideline tables use NCP income to determine child support amount, but provincial/territorial order amounts vary slightly because income tax is taken into accountOrder will be made in CANADIAN dollarsIf establishment request comes through the IV-D system the order will be sent to local child support program for enforcement if the custodial parent requestsIn private cases the resulting Canadian order can usually be enrolled with the local enforcement program However some enforcement programs may be reluctant to let a foreign creditor directly register check first *

Establishment in QuebecQuebec has not proclaimed its ISO legislation yet (anticipated in 2013-2014) Current legislation ( REMO Act) does not allow a foreign creditor (CP) to request establishment of a child support orderParent must retain lawyer in Quebec and bring an application before Court in QuebecMay be a consideration in determining whether it would be better to use domestic (US) law to establish the order, and then send the order for enforcement*

Establishment of PAT & Child Support in U.S. for Foreign PetitionerIV-D Policy on Direct Applications PIQ 99-01 As of today, Anybody Anywhere can apply for IV-D servicesLegal Basis: Why not? Status of the place from which a cp applies for services is irrelevant in an establishment case filed under UIFSA People ex rel. A.K., 2003 WL NCP = CO, CP = Russia HELD: CO can EST for applicant residing in Russia; CO guidelines may need deviation. Practice Tip: Verify with DOS that providing legal assistance and facilitating the transfer of money to a N. Korean, Iranian, or Cuban CP does not constitute trading with the enemy or violation of an economic boycott.Law Applicable: Lex fori & Petitioner need not travel to U.S. UIFSA 2001 316(a) & rules of evidence & inter-tribunal communications apply

*

Enforcement of Child Support in a Foreign Country U.S. ViewFederal or State IV-D Reciprocity; Forms & Procedures Give them what they want: Documents, Certificates, Translation, Foreign Currency Equivalence etcLong ArmLocal Counsel; DOS Websites & Judicial Assistance Circulars not so helpful for Child Support if Non-reciprocating Country

*

Enforcement of Foreign Orders in CanadaA foreign support order (child or spousal) must be registered before it can be enforcedRegistration process comes under ISO Act and is similar to UIFSA processRegistration must be done by designated authority (no private process) but applicant can send order directly to designated authority The order is registered by filing it with the CourtNotice of the registration is given to the respondentRespondent can object to registration on basis he/she did not have notice, the order is contrary to public policy, or the Court that made it did not have jurisdiction (long arm could arise here) If registration is set aside order is treated as if it were a request to establish a new order

*

Enforcement RemediesEnforcement of child support is rarely done privately in CanadaPrivate enforcement can be costly and in many provinces/territories there are enforcement remedies that are only available to child support programProvincial/territorial enforcement programs use same type of enforcement measures as in USGarnishment, liens, interception of funds and incomePassport denials, drivers licence suspension Contempt-type court applications*

Recognition & Enforcement of Foreign Orders in U.S. Legal Basis - Federal Law & Policy42 USC 659a Secretary of State and HHS designate a country to be a Foreign Reciprocating Country (FRC)

42 USC 659a(d) U.S. States can make reciprocity arrangements with foreign countries until superseded by FRC

Federal Policy: Request from FRC shall be treated the same as a request from a U.S. state*

State Foreign Country Arrangements - Constitutional? Yes!Article II, Sec. 2, Clause 2 Grants the President the power to make Treaties with the concurrence of 2/3 of the Senate

Article I, Sec 10 Clause 1 provides no state can enter into a treaty

Article I, Sec. 10, Clause 3 provides no state can enter into an agreement or compact ...with a foreign power without the Consent of Congress = 42 USC 659a(d)

*

Other State Law Providing Legal BasisUIFSA 2001 102 (21) (B) (in addition to reciprocating countries) a country which hasEnacted a law or established procedures for issuing and enforcing support orders that are substantially similar to UIFSA procedures

UIFSA 2001 104 (Remedies Cumulative/Not Exclusive) Recognition of foreign orders on the basis of other law OK, including comity (cant register but can use UIFSA evidentiary & inter-tribunal communications provisions

*

State? Comity? Grave v Schubert, 2000 WL1221343 (Minn.App.) UK order modifying MN order not recognized by MN because UK modified MN CEJ order. If UK does not recognize concept of CEJ, then it is not a state Foreman v. Foreman, 144 N.C.App. 582, 550 S.E.2d 792 (N.C.App., Jul 03, 2001) NC has jurisdiction to enforce England order since England is a state per a unilateral reciprocity extension agreement Haker, 143 N.C.App. 688, 547 S.E.2d 127 Swiss Order not enforced because no reciprocity, no substantial similarity and not recognized under comity because no requirement of personal jurisdiction over respondent Desselberg v. Peele, 523 S.E.2d Neither full faith and credit nor Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders Act apply to foreign orders, but NC will honor German order on the basis of comity

*

Recognition & Enforcement of Foreign Orders in U.S. ContdIndigent Clients have IV-D Agency Option OCSE PIQ 99-01 Direct ApplicationsLaw ApplicableG/R Lex Fori UIFSA 2001 303(1) Use local procedural and substantive lawChoice of Law UIFSA 2001 604 (a)(1) law of issuing state governs nature, extent, duration and amount of current supportStatute of Limitation UIFSA 2001 604(b) in an action for arrears, whichever statute (issuing or responding state) is longer

*

Duration of Child SupportIn most provinces/territories child support will continue past the age of majority (18 or 19 years of age)Will continue for so long as the child is unable to withdraw from parents charge or unable to obtain the necessaries of life because of illness, disability or other cause...Other cause includes continuing in post-secondary education, inability to find gainful employment and generally a continuing dependency upon the custodial parentCustodial parent will have to establish that the child continues to be dependentSome provinces/territories may require a Court order to stop child support (unless the parents agree)

*

Recognition & Enforcement of Foreign Orders in U.S. ContdCurrency Conversion Judgment Date G/R

Breach Date ameliorates fluctuating ratesAker Verdal, 828 P.2d 610

Payment Date

See, Barry J. Brooks International Family Support: Currency Conversion paper in materials

*

Currency ConversionUnder ISO orders expressed in US dollars will be converted for enforcement to Canadian dollars using exchange rate in effect on date the order was made or last variedISO Acts have no provision to modify or update this conversion rateCan result in discrepancies between what is owing in US dollars (under a US order) and the converted amount in Canadian dollarsRecommended solution is to obtain an order in a US Court confirming the outstanding arrears - this can then be registered and will convert the arrears to the current equivalent amountThe currency conversion done under ISO does not modify the underlying foreign order it simply states an Canadian dollar equivalent for enforcement purposes*

Recognition & Enforcement of Foreign Orders in U.S. ContdModificationUIFSA 2001 611 if issuing foreign court can not or will not modify its own order, U.S. state can modify & bind all subject to its jurisdiction

Cannot modify duration of foreign order UIFSA 2001 604

Cannot modify spousal support order of another state UIFSA 2001 211*

Modification of orders - CanadaYes - Canadian courts may reduce or eliminate arrears of child support under foreign (and domestic) child support orders!Legal basis is generally that there has been a significant change in circumstances and that it would be grossly unfair not to vary the arrearsA request by a party in Canada will be made under ISO, and that request will be transmitted to the jurisdiction where the other party lives Hearing will take place in the other jurisdictionUIFSA provisions are available to initiate a modification of a Canadian order being enforced in the United States BUT Orders made under the Canadian Divorce Act cannot be varied outside CanadaA modification request must be made directly to the Court in CanadaIf initiated by the Canadian party other parent will be served ex-juris*

Recognition & Enforcement of Foreign Orders in U.S. ContdDefenses Not an Order Commonwealth Provisional OrderGerman Youth Welfare Office Executable deedMay be better for NCP than local order

Due Process & Public Policy See, Schuber, supraIsraeli CaseReciprocity does not supersede

*

ResourcesOCSE Caseworkers Guides (available on OCSE website) Canadian Federal Department of Justice website Canadian Provincial Enforcement Program websitesGarys paper Judicial Assistance Conventions in Effect for Mexico and the USA (in materials) Handout Completing USM Forms to send to MexicoList of Helpful Websites (in materials)

*

Speaker Contact InformationHannah RootsBritish Columbia Maintenance Enforcement Program2nd Floor 609 Broughton StreetVictoria , British ColumbiaCanada(250) 220 4031hroots@fmep.ag.gov.bc.ca

Gary Caswell, Esq. 318 Sumner Drive San Antonio, Texas 78209 USA Telephone: 210-414-1645 gcaswell@nunezcaswell.com

*

UIFSA 2008

Speaker

Margaret Campbell HaynesSenior AssociateCenter for the Support of Families

*

Goals of UIFSA 2008 Implement the Hague Convention

Address international cases in general

Build upon UIFSA 2001*

International Case ProcessingHague Convention is not exclusive remedy for international orders.UIFSA already contained provisions re: bilateral agreements and state reciprocity arrangements.A tribunal may also recognize a foreign order on basis of comity.Some concepts CEJ and DCO do not fit neatly in international arena.*

New Definition of Foreign CountryUIFSA 2001 incl. qualified foreign countries within definition of State

UIFSA 2008 has separate definition that incl. many, but not all, foreign nations:

*

A country, including a political subdivision thereof, other than the United States, that authorizes the issuance of support orders and:(A) has been declared under US law to be a foreign reciprocating country; (B) Has established a state reciprocal arrangement for child support; (C) Has law or procedures for the issuance and enforcement of support orders which are substantially similar to UIFSA procedures; or (D) In which the Convention is in force with respect to the United States.

*

Road MapArticles 1 6, and as applicable Article 7, apply to a support proceeding involving:A foreign support order;A foreign tribunal; orAn obligee, obligor, or child residing in a foreign country.Articles 1 6 may be applied by a tribunal recognizing and enforcing a support order on basis of comityArticle 7 applies only to Convention proceedings.

*

Article 7DefinitionsCentral AuthorityForeign support agreements (maintenance arrangements)Procedure for registration, recognition and enforcementLimited modification

*

Enforcement under UIFSA 2008Direct income withholding only for support orders issued by a state. No longer requires US employers to honor DIWs from foreign countries.

*

Registration for EnforcementProcedure for non-Hague Foreign Support OrdersUIFSA 2001Procedure for Hague Foreign Support OrdersNew Article 7Major difference DocumentsTime framesDefenses

*

Documents RequiredNon-Hague Foreign Support OrdersTransmittal Letter Two copies of order, incl. one certified copySworn or certified statement re: arrearsCertain obligor informationCertain obligee informationIf applicable, name and address of person to whom support payments are to be sentRequest for DCO, if appropriate

*

Documents Required (contd)Hague Foreign Support OrdersTransmittal Letter Complete text of order [or abstract by issuing foreign tribunal]Record that order is enforceable in issuing countryIf default order, a record attesting to due process re: notice & opportunity to be heardRecord re: arrearsRecord re: automatic adjustment of supportIf necessary, a record re: receipt of free legal assistance in issuing country

*

Time Frame to Contest Non-Hague Foreign Support OrdersWithin [20] days after notice of registration Hague Foreign Support OrdersNot later than 30 days after notice of registration Not later than 60 days after notice if contesting party does not reside in US

*

New DefensesHague Foreign Support Orders

Recognition and enforcement of order is manifestly incompatible with public policy, including failure of issuing tribunal to observe minimum standards of due process;

Issuing tribunal lacked personal jurisdiction consistent with Section 201;

Order is not enforceable in issuing country;

If default order, there was a lack of due process re: notice & opportunity to be heard*

Registration for Enforcement (contd)Hague Foreign Support OrdersIf a tribunal of a state does not recognize a Convention support order becauseThere was a lack of personal jurisdictionThere was procedural fraudA proceeding between same parties with same purpose is pending before a tribunal of that state and that proceeding was filed firstThe order is a default order but the notice and opportunity to challenge did not satisfy due process Then the tribunal may not dismiss the proceeding without allowing a reasonable time for a party to request the establishment of a new Convention support order.

*

Registration for Enforcement (contd)

In fact, in a recognition and enforcement case that the IV-D child support agency is handling, the agency must take all appropriate measures to request a child-support order for the obligee.

*

What needs to happen? The Senate gave advice and consent to ratify the Convention on September 29, 2010.

Congress must approve the implementing legislation.

States must adopt UIFSA 2008. The President must deposit documentation with the Hague Conference on Private International Law ratifying the Convention.

*

Status of Bilateral AgreementsThe U.S. currently has bilateral reciprocity agreements with 15 countries and 11 Canadian Provinces.Convention does not affect any bilateral agreements.

*

Foreign Reciprocating Countries AustraliaCanadian Provinces/TerritoriesAlberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Northwest Territories, Nunavut, Newfoundland/Labrador, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Saskatchewan, YukonCzech RepublicEl SalvadorFinland

*

Foreign Reciprocating Countries (contd) HungaryIrelandIsraelNetherlandsNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak RepublicSwitzerlandThe United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

*

*2007 Hague Child Support ConventionInternational Families Money, Children and Long Term PlanningWashington D.C., 25 May 2012

Philippe Lortie, First SecretaryHague Conference on Private International LawABA Section of International Law

*STATES INVOLVED IN THE NEGOTIATIONS FROM 2003 UNTIL 2007

KEY FEATURESCHILD SUPPORT CONVENTIONUniversalityAccessibilitySimplicity & FlexibilitySpeed & EfficiencyCost-effectivenessResponsive and fairNon-discriminationCo-operation and compliance*

PRINCIPAL COMPONENTSOF NEW CONVENTIONSystem of administrative co-operation (efficient, responsive, flexible, accessible)Procedures available in States for establishment, recognition and enforcement, modification of decisions and recovery of arrearsEffective access to proceduresRecognition and enforcement of foreign decisions / orders (maximum recognition, simple procedures)Swift and effective enforcementCompliance Monitoring and reviewDirect requests to competent authoritiesApplicable law rules set out in an optional Protocol*

SCOPE OF APPLICATION OF CONVENTIONEntire Convention applies on a mandatory basis to maintenance cases of persons under the age of 21 (possible to reserve for persons under the age of 18)Convention covers recognition and enforcement of spousal support when combined with child support - its provision on administrative co-operation will only apply to spousal support where States have made a declaration to extend application of ConventionApplication of any part of the Convention could be extended by way of declaration (with reciprocal effect) to other maintenance obligations arising from a family relationship, parentage, marriage or affinityConvention could be extended to vulnerable adultsConvention applies to children regardless of the marital status of the parents*

TWO TRACKS1)Applications through Central Authorities (CAs) Children under the age of 21 (or 18 reservation)Spousal support combined with child support if State has made a declaration to extend scope Other maintenance obligations if State has made a declaration to extend scope2)Direct request to a competent authorityDirect requests possible for any procedure available under internal law including, subject to Article 18, for establishment and modificationConvention procedures for recognition and enforcement available subject to some limitations *

ADMINISTRATIVE CO-OPERATIONAPPLICATIONS THROUGH CAsAdministrative co-operation implemented using Central Authorities (CAs)CAs focal point in relation to specific functions:Transmitting and receiving applicationsInitiating or facilitating proceedings Time lines and responsivenessMeans of communication*

ADMINISTRATIVE CO-OPERATION (cont.)Convention will provide for specific applications using recommended forms:Recognition and enforcement of Contracting States decisionsEnforcement of requested State decisionEstablishment of decision in requested State when no existing decision or when enforcement of existing decision impossibleModification of decisions either by creditor or debtorRecovery of arrears*

OTHER CENTRAL AUTHORITY FUNCTIONS

Help locate debtor / creditorHelp obtain information about financial circumstancesEncourage amicable solutionsFacilitate enforcementFacilitate transfer of paymentsFacilitate obtaining of documentary and other evidence and service of documentsAssistance in establishing parentageHelp in obtaining provisional measuresRequests for specific measures (limited service requests)*

EFFECTIVE ACCESS TO PROCEDURESAll Contracting States obliged to provide effective accessto procedures, including enforcement and appealprocedures, by providing: Simple procedures with the assistance of CAs allowing the applicant to proceed without further assistance Free legal assistance for applications for establishment and for recognition and enforcement of child support decisions (with some exceptions) A State may, as an alternative, declare that it will apply a child-centred means test, in cases involving establishment of child support For all other applications processed through CAs under the Convention legal assistance may be subject to a means or merits test*

DIRECT REQUESTS (Art. 37)Direct requests possible for any procedure available under internal law including, subject to Article 18, for establishment and modificationCertain provisions of the Convention apply to direct requests for recognition and enforcement - Article 14(5) no security, bond or deposit required - Article 17(2) national treatment re legal aid - Chapter V (Recognition and enforcement) - Chapter VI (Enforcement) - Chapter VII (Public Bodies) - Chapter VIII (General Provisions) with the exception of Articles 40(2) (non-disclosure determination by CA), 42 (power of attorney), 43(3) (recovery of costs from State), 44(3) (CA language requirement), 45 (translations costs) and 55 (amendment of forms).*

RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENTConvention applies to judicial and administrative decisions, settlements, maintenance agreements (authentic instruments)Main bases for recognition and enforcement (indirect jurisdiction)Respondent habitually resident in the State of originRespondent submitted to the jurisdictionCreditor habitually resident in the State of origin (reservation possible)Child resident in the State of origin when proceedings instituted and respondent lived with the child there or resided there and provided support for the child thereAgreement to the jurisdiction by the parties except in the case of child support (reservation possible)Authority exercising jurisdiction on a matter of personal status or parental responsibility (reservation possible)*

RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT(cont.)Grounds for refusing recognition and enforcement Decision manifestly incompatible with public policy Decision obtained by fraud relating to procedure Competition between pending case and foreign decision Conflicting decisions (res judicata) No proper notice or opportunity to be heard Debtor exceeded limits on proceedings (Article 18)*

PROCEDURES FOR RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENTRegistration for enforcement grounds for refusal are limited no submissions from the partiesChallenge or appeal within limited time and on limited groundsFurther appeal if permitted by law of State addressed, without staying the enforcement of the decisionAlternative procedureLinkage with national enforcement procedures*

ENFORCEMENT MEASURESWeakness under existing child support systems has been a lack of effective enforcement mechanismsWhile choice of specific enforcement measures are left to the requested State, States are required to make available effective enforcement measuresConvention provides a list of possible measures that a State might, at its option, use, includingWage withholdingGarnishmentDeductions from social security paymentsLien on or forced sale of propertyTax refund withholdingLicense denial or suspension*

NEW ROLE FOR ATTORNEYSAdvise clients on best track (CA or Direct Request) Legal tradition differences and language barriers CA services v. domestic attorney Cost issues (access to procedures / legal aid) Speed of procedures Advise clients on available applications Domestic or foreign establishment? Any reservation on recognition and enforcement? What is the most favourable law?Domestic establishment + foreign service + recognition and enforcement abroad Foreign establishment + domestic service + direct enforcement abroad?*

FUTURE COMING INTO FORCE

USA signed the Convention on 23-XI-2007Burkina Faso signed the Convention on 7-I-2009Ukraine signed the Convention on 7-VII-2010EU approved the Protocol on 8-IV-2010 and signed the Convention on 6-IV-2011Norway ratified the Convention on 6-IV-2011Albania signed the Convention on 21-X-2011Bosnia and Herzegovina signed the Convention on 5-VII-2011Other States to join soon: Brazil

*

*Questions

Permanent Bureau Hague Conference on Private International Law6, Scheveningseweg2517 KT The Hague The NetherlandsTel.: + 31 (70) 363 3303Fax: + 31 (70) 360 4867E-mail: secretariat@hcch.netWebsite: www.hcch.net

Thank You-Gary-Hannah-Meg-Philippe-Rhiannon*

***************************