Jersey: Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters

Although the Bailiwick of Jersey is part of the British Isles, it is not part of the United Kingdom and is a self-governing dependency of the British Crown.

Jersey is not a signatory to any international conventions or treaties in relation to the enforcement of foreign judgments.

In terms of arrangements, Jersey has a statutory regime for the registration of judgments from the superior courts of certain specified countries, being England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Isle of Man and Guernsey .

This statutory regime (Statutory Regime) is governed by the Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) (Jersey) Law 1960 (the 1960 Law) together with the Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) (Jersey) Act 1973 (the 1973 Act) and the Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Rules 1961 (the Rules).

As set out above, Jersey is not a signatory to any such international treaties.

The above-mentioned Statutory Regime has the following reservation.  Under that legislation, the States of Jersey has the power to make judgments from other countries unenforceable if it considers that the treatment in respect of recognition and enforcement accorded by the courts of any other country to judgments given in Jersey is substantially less favorable than that accorded by the courts of Jersey to judgments of the superior courts of that country.

Where the Statutory Regime does not apply, enforcement of a foreign judgment in Jersey is governed by the customary law which has its own rules as discussed below.

Under the Statutory Regime a foreign judgment or order must satisfy the following basic criteria:

1. The foreign judgment must originate from a ‘superior’ court of England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Isle of Man and Guernsey as follows:
   1. England and Wales – House of Lords, Court of Appeal, High Court of Justice
   2. Scotland – Court of Session, Sheriff Court
   3. Northern Ireland – Supreme Court of Judicature
   4. Isle of Man – Her Majesty’s High Court of Justice (including the Staff of Government Division)
   5. Guernsey – Royal Court, Court of Appeal
2. The foreign judgment or order must be:
   1. final and conclusive between the parties (a judgment is deemed to be final and conclusive notwithstanding that an appeal may be pending); and
   2. for payment of a sum of money which is not in respect of taxes or other similar payments, or in respect of a fine or other penalty.
3. The foreign judgment must have been given after the coming into operation of the 1960 Law.

At customary law, a foreign judgment has no direct operation but may (1) be enforceable (as discussed further below) by claim or counterclaim, or (2) be recognised as a defence to a claim or as conclusive of an issue in a claim.  A foreign judgment may be enforced or recognised at customary law if it is a final judgment in personam for a liquidated sum of money, which is not in respect of taxes, fines, penalties or other similar fiscal or revenue liabilities, provided that the court had jurisdiction to give the judgment and the judgment is obtained without fraud, in accordance with the principles of natural justice, is not contrary to public policy, and the proceedings were properly served.

The Royal Court has also held that it has a discretion at customary law, to be exercised ‘cautiously‘[1], to enforce foreign in personam non-monetary judgments given by courts of competent jurisdiction.

[1] Royal Court in Brunei Investment Agency and Bandone -v- Fidelis Nominees Limited [2008] JLR 337

Under the Statutory Regime the judgment creditor must apply to the Royal Court to register a foreign judgment, and the application may be made ex parte to the Judicial Greffier (an officer of the Royal Court).

That application must be supported by an affidavit which, among other things, must exhibit a certified copy of the judgment issued by the original court (and a certified translation where appropriate) authenticated by that court’s seal.

Once a foreign judgment has been registered, notice in writing of that registration must be served on the judgment debtor by personal service if within the jurisdiction (unless otherwise ordered by the Royal Court or the Judicial Greffier), or if outside the jurisdiction then in accordance with the rules applicable to service of Jersey process outside Jersey.  It is important to note that personal service within Jersey must be carried out by the Viscount (the executive officer of the Royal Court).

The notice must state:

1. full particulars of the registered judgment and the order for registration;
2. the name and address of the judgment creditor (or their legal representative);
3. the judgment debtor’s right to apply to aside the registered judgment on the grounds specified in the 1960 Law; and
4. the time from the date of service of the notice an application to set aside may be made.

A registered judgment may not be enforced until after the expiration of the period within which an application to set aside may be made.  A party wishing to enforce a registered judgment must produce to the Viscount (who administers enforcement over moveable property situate in Jersey) an affidavit of service of the notice of registration and of any order made by the Court in relation to the judgment registered.

As above, a judgment creditor may enforce a foreign judgment under customary law by commencing proceedings on the basis of that foreign judgment and seeking summary judgment without the Royal Court’s (re)consideration of the merits of the underlying cause of action upon which the judgment debt was made.

The proceedings are commenced by way of an Order of Justice which is an originating procedure usually initiated for more complex claims as it requires formal pleadings detailing the legal and factual basis of the proposed claim. In the case of enforcing a foreign judgment, it is not necessary to provide full detail of the underlying claim as the Royal Court will accept a narrative in summary form to establish the cause of action of an unsatisfied debt, and it is common to annex a copy of the judgment to be enforced.

The Order of Justice must be served on the judgment debtor.  Where the judgment debtor is not resident in Jersey, leave from Royal Court of Jersey to serve the Order of Justice in the jurisdiction in which the judgment debtor resides will be required which entails making an ex parte application to the Royal Court of Jersey.

The Order of Justice will summon the judgment debtor to an initial administrative hearing.  If the judgment debtor does not appear at that hearing and indicate that they will defend the action (for example, on the basis that the judgment is not enforceable), then default judgment may be granted.

Where the judgment debtor defends the proceedings, the judgment creditor may apply for summary judgment on the basis that the judgment debtor has no real prospect of successfully defending the claim or issue, and there is no other compelling reason why the claim or issue should be disposed of at a trial. Otherwise, the proceedings will progress to a trial.

As set out above, under the Statutory Regime a certified copy of the judgment issued by the original court authenticated by its seal must be exhibited to the affidavit in support of the judgment creditor’s application to register the foreign judgment.

Where the foreign judgment is not in the French or English language, the applicant must also obtain a certified translation of the judgment certified by a notary public or authenticated by affidavit.

At customary law, as set out above, it is usual to evidence the foreign judgment by provision of a certified copy.

The process of registering and enforcing a foreign judgment in the Royal Court of Jersey under the 1960 Law is relatively quick and straightforward.  In practice, we have seen that the application may be submitted to the Judicial Greffier in writing and determined by the Judicial Greffier on the papers.  This process could take as little as a week from the submission of the papers, depending on the Judicial Greffier’s availability.  If the Judicial Greffier has questions, or requires a hearing, the process could take longer.  Once a foreign judgment has been registered, it must be served on the judgment debtor as set out above and (as also set out above) may not be enforced until the period for applying to set aside the judgment has expired.

The duration of common law proceedings will largely depend on whether they are defended by the judgment debtor or not. In the circumstances that proceedings are not defended, the judgment creditor may apply for default judgment to bring the proceedings to a swift conclusion. Where proceedings are defended, a judgment creditor can seek an order for summary judgment on the grounds that the judgment debtor has no real prospect of succeeding and there is no other compelling reason why the case or issue should be disposed of at trial.  The time period for applying for summary judgment will depend on the Royal Court’s availability and the time that will reasonably be needed for both sides to prepare for the hearing.

Yes.

Under the Statutory Regime, an applicant must register the foreign judgment within six years of the date of the date of the foreign judgment. Where the judgment has been appealed, the date of the last judgment in the appeal proceedings would apply.  Once the Royal Court has registered the foreign judgment, it will be treated as a local judgment and enforceable for ten years from the date on which it became enforceable in Jersey.

There does not appear to be any time limit for the enforcement of foreign judgments at customary law.  However, it should be noted that the Royal Court is unlikely to enforce a foreign judgment which is no longer enforceable as a matter of the law of the relevant foreign jurisdiction.

Upon the application of a judgment debtor, by way of summons, seeking to set aside a registered judgment, the Royal Court will set aside the registration if it is satisfied that:

1. the foreign judgment is not a judgment to which the 1960 Law applies;
2. the foreign court had no jurisdiction to grant the foreign judgment;
3. the judgment debtor did not receive notice of the proceedings in sufficient time to enable them to defend the proceedings and they did not appear;
4. the foreign judgment was obtained by fraud;
5. enforcement of the foreign judgment would be contrary to public policy in Jersey; or
6. the rights under the foreign judgment are not vested in the person by whom the application for registration was [1]

The Royal Court may also set aside the registered foreign judgment if the matter in dispute in the foreign jurisdiction had, prior to the date of that judgment, been subject to a final and conclusive judgment by another court having jurisdiction in the matter.

Under the Jersey common law procedure, a foreign judgment may be challenged if:

1. the foreign court had no jurisdiction to grant the foreign judgment;
2. the foreign judgment was obtained by fraud;
3. enforcement of the foreign judgment would be contrary to public policy; or
4. enforcement of the foreign judgment would be contrary to natural justice.

[1] Article 6(1)(a), 1960 Law

No.

Yes.  Under the Statutory Regime, the foreign court will be deemed by the Royal Court to have jurisdiction where:

1. The foreign judgment was given in an action in personam if:
   1. the judgment debtor, being a defendant in the foreign proceedings, submitted to the jurisdiction of that court by voluntarily appearing in the proceedings otherwise than for the purpose of protecting, or obtaining the release of, property seized, or threatened with seizure, in the proceedings, or of contesting the jurisdiction of that court; or
   2. the judgment debtor was plaintiff in, or counter-claimed in, the proceedings in the foreign court; or
   3. the judgment debtor, being a defendant in the foreign proceedings, had before the commencement of those proceedings agreed, in respect of the subject matter of the proceedings, to submit to the jurisdiction of that court or of the courts of the country of that court; or
   4. the judgment debtor, being a defendant in the foreign proceedings, was at the time when the proceedings were instituted resident in, or being a body corporate had its principal place of business in, the country of that court; or
   5. the judgment debtor, being a defendant in the foreign proceedings, had an office or place of business in the country of that court and the proceedings in that court were in respect of a transaction effected through or at that office or place;
2. the foreign judgment was given in an action of which the subject matter was immovable property or in an action in rem of which the subject matter was movable property, if the property in question was at the time of the proceedings in the foreign proceedings situate in the country of that court;
3. the foreign judgment was given in an action other than the actions set out in (a) and (b) above, if the jurisdiction of the foreign court is recognised by the law of Jersey.

In contrast, the court of the foreign judgment will not be deemed to have had jurisdiction:

1. if the subject matter of the proceedings was immovable property outside the country of the foreign court; or
2. except in the cases mentioned above at paragraphs (a)(i)-(a)(iii) and (c), if the bringing of the proceedings in the foreign court was contrary to an agreement whereby the dispute in question was to be settled otherwise than by proceedings in the courts of the country of that court; or
3. if the judgment debtor, being a defendant in the foreign proceedings, was a person who was entitled to immunity from the jurisdiction of the courts of the country of the foreign court in accordance with public international law and they did not submit to the jurisdiction of that court.

At customary law, a foreign court will be considered to have jurisdiction (so far as the Jersey court is concerned) in the following cases:

1. The judgment debtor was, at the time the proceedings were instituted, present in the foreign country.
2. The judgment debtor was claimant, or counterclaimed, in the proceedings in the foreign court.
3. The judgment debtor, being a defendant in the foreign court, submitted to the jurisdiction of that court by voluntarily appearing in the proceedings.
4. The judgment debtor, being a defendant in the original court, had before the commencement of the proceedings agreed, in respect of the subject matter of the proceedings, to submit to the jurisdiction of that court or of the courts of that country.

This list is not necessarily exclusive.

The Statutory Regime does not impose any requirements on the manner of service of the original foreign proceedings. A foreign judgment in default may be registered and enforced in Jersey.

However it should be noted that, as set out above, one of the grounds available to a judgment debtor to apply to set aside registration of a foreign judgment is that the judgment debtor did not receive notice of the proceedings in sufficient time to enable them to defend the proceedings and they did not appear.

The same principles would likely apply at customary law.

Under the Statutory Regime, the Royal Court does not have discretion as to whether or not it should recognise a foreign judgment that satisfies all the criteria imposed by the Statutory Regime.   Article 4(1) of the 1960 Law states that: ‘on any such application the court shall [our emphasis], subject to proof of the prescribed matters and to the other provisions of this Law, order the judgment to be registered‘.

At customary law, there would appear to be an element of discretion.  This can be seen, for example, in the requirement that the judgment not be contrary to public policy or natural justice, as well as in the explicit discretion (to be exercised cautiously) to enforce a foreign non-money judgment as described above.

As set out above, the Statutory Regime requires the foreign judgment to be a sum of money which is not payable in respect of taxes or other charges of a like nature or in respect of a fine or other penalty.

The Statutory Regime does not provide for the enforcement of non-money judgments.

At customary law, as set out above, the Royal Court will not enforce a foreign judgment for a sum of money which is not in respect of taxes, fines, penalties or other similar fiscal or revenue liabilities.  It will also not enforce judgments which are contrary to public policy.  We are not aware of any cases where the Royal Court has had to decide whether foreign judgments for punitive or multiple damages are contrary to public policy.

As set out above in the case of Brunei Investment Agency v Fidelis [2008] JRC 152 the Royal Court confirmed that it could apply its discretion to enforce non-money judgments, albeit that the discretion was to be exercised ‘cautiously‘.

Yes. Article 3(3) of the Rules states that ‘judgment shall be deemed to be final and conclusive notwithstanding that an appeal may be pending against it, or that it may still be subject to appeal, in the courts of the country of the original court.’

The same principle applies at common law.

Under the Statutory Regime the Royal Court does have the power, upon an application to set aside the registration of a foreign judgment, to either set aside the registration or adjourn the application to asset aside the registration until after the expiration of such period as the Royal Court considers is reasonably sufficient to enable the applicant to take necessary steps to have the appeal disposed of.

At customary law, the Royal Court would have a discretion to stay enforcement proceedings pending any appeal.

Yes. The statutory process for registering a foreign judgment under the 1960 Law permits a judgment debtor to apply to set aside the registration of the foreign judgment. The grounds for such an application are detailed at Question 11 above.

At customary law, an appeal can be made against a summary judgment on ordinary principles.

Yes. Article 4(6) of the 1960 Law provides that, in addition to any sum payable under the judgment of the foreign court, the foreign judgment can include interest due pursuant to the law of the foreign court up until the date of registration.

The Royal Court will award pre-judgment interest which by the law of the foreign country becomes due under the judgment up to the time of registration, and has a discretion to award post judgment interest (not exceeding 4%) from the date of registration of the judgment.

Similar principles will apply at customary law.

No; However, Article 4(3) of the 1960 Law provides that: ‘where the sum payable under a judgment which is to be registered is expressed in a currency other than the currency of Jersey, the judgment shall be registered as if it were a judgment for such sum in the currency of Jersey as, on the basis of the rate of exchange prevailing at the date of the judgment of the original court, is equivalent to the sum so payable.”

In addition, under Rule 4(2) of the Rules, the affidavit in support of an application for registration of the foreign judgment requires that where any sum payable under the foreign judgment is expressed in a currency other than the currency of Jersey, shall also state the sterling equivalent calculated at the prevailing rate at the date of the judgment.

Article 4(6) of the 1960 Law provides that: ‘In addition to the sum of money payable under the judgment of the original court, including any interest which by the law of the country of the original court becomes due under the judgment up to the time of registration, the judgment shall be registered for the reasonable costs of and incidental to registration, including the costs of obtaining a certified copy of the judgment from the original court.’

At customary law, a successful party on a summary judgment application will generally be awarded their reasonable costs of and incidental to the action and the application.

Third parties are permitted to fund litigation in Jersey providing that the funding arrangement is not contrary to public policy on the grounds of champerty. The Royal Court held in Re Valetta Trust [2011]JRC227 (later upheld by Barclays Wealth Trustees (Jersey) Limited and anor v Equity Trust (Jersey) Limited and anor [2013]JRC094) that it was willing to permit third party funding in circumstances that:

• The control of the proceedings remains with the plaintiffs;
• The plaintiffs retain a substantial proportion of the damages if successful; and
• the defendants are protected in respect of costs if the claim fails.

It will be interesting to follow how Jersey law will evolve in relation to the enforcement of ‘non money’ judgments at customary law.

Jersey has not ratified the Hague Judgments Convention 2019. We do not consider it likely that this convention will be ratified in the foreseeable future.

Jersey has not ratified the Hague Judgments Convention 2019. As above, we do not consider it likely that this convention will be ratified in the foreseeable future.