ARTICLE
29 November 2013

Enforcing Foreign Judgments Delivered By A Superior Court Of The United Kingdom

A
Appleby

Contributor

Appleby is one of the world’s leading offshore law firms, operating in 10 highly regarded and well-regulated locations. We provide comprehensive, expert advice and services across a number of key practice areas. We work with our clients to achieve practical solutions whether from a single location or across multiple jurisdictions.
Until the decision of the Supreme Court in Sumputh v Holborn College Limited 2012 SCJ 193 (Sumputh), it was understood that a judgment creditor which sought to enforce a judgment delivered by a superior court of the United Kingdom could avail itself of any of the following three pieces of legislation namely...
United Kingdom Wealth Management

Until the decision of the Supreme Court in Sumputh v Holborn College Limited 2012 SCJ 193 (Sumputh), it was understood that a judgment creditor which sought to enforce a judgment delivered by a superior court of the United Kingdom could avail itself of any of the following three pieces of legislation namely:

  • the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1961 (1961 Act); or
  • the Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Act 1923 (1923 Act); or
  • article 546 of the Mauritian Code of Civil Procedure ("exequatur" proceedings).

In Sumputh (supra), the Supreme Court, sitting in its first instance jurisdiction, heard and granted an application that was based on the 1961 Act to enforce a judgment delivered by the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court of England (Queen's Bench Division).

For details of the appeal please click here.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More