Recognition and Enforcement of KapMuG Judgments

  • Thijs BostersEmail author


Although under the Brussels Regulation it is not required to commence a procedure in order to have a judgment recognised and/or enforced in another Member States, the Regulation contains various grounds based on which the recognition and/or enforcement can be refused. These grounds relate to—among others—the correct service of the parties involved, the rules on public order in the Member States were recognition/enforcement is sought, and possible conflicts with other judgments or procedures in other states. A lot of parties are involved in a collective redress procedure and it depends on the type of mechanism whether and how the parties involved need to be served correctly. This chapter will set out whether a KapMuG judgment can be recognised and or enforced in another Member State based on the rules in the Brussels Regulation.


Recognition Enforcement Judgment Court settlement Public order Service of documents Conflicting judgments 


  1. Briggs A (2009) Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments. Informa Law, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Kramberger Skerl J (2011) ‘European Public Policy’. Journal of Private International LawGoogle Scholar
  3. Magnus U et al (2016) ‘Brussels I Regulation’. Sellier, MunichGoogle Scholar
  4. Reuschle F et al (2008). Kölner kommentar zum Kapmug. Verlag C.H. Beck, MunichGoogle Scholar
  5. Rosner N (2004) Cross-border recognition and enforcement of foreign money judgments in civil and commercial matters. Thesis Groningen UniversityGoogle Scholar
  6. Stadler A (2009) A test case in Germany: 16,000 private investors vs. Deutsche Telekom. ERA Forum 10Google Scholar

Copyright information

© T.M.C. Asser Press and the author 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Supreme Court of the NetherlandsThe HagueThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations