The recognition and enforcement of International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) awards in Germany is governed by Chapter IV, section 6 of the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States of 18 March 1965 ICSID Convention arts 53–55 and by the German implementing statute, the Law to the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States or the Investitionsstreitbeilegungsgesetz (InvStreitÜbkG). The 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York Convention) does not apply. German law distinguishes between the declaration of enforceability (‘Recognition’) and the subsequent execution (‘Enforcement’) of the award. According to InvStreitÜbkG, art 2(1), an ICSID award can only be enforced once a German court has determined it’s enforceability. Three points characterise the German regime in practice: • German courts may not review an ICSID award on the merits. There is no public policy exception and no review of the tribunal’s jurisdiction–the narrowest standard

Dispute Resolution analysis: Two sets of neighbours found themselves in multiple sets of litigation against each other. The litigation arose as a result of excavation works which one set of neighbours intended to carry out in order to build a basement complex. The litigation was compromised by a Tomlin order. The Tomlin order provided that, in the event of a dispute about the level of compensation to be paid because of the works, either party would have ‘a right to appeal…which for all purposes shall be treated as an appeal under [the Party Wall etc. Act 1996]’. After a dispute arose as to the level of compensation to be paid, one set of neighbours appealed to the County Court under the Party Wall etc. Act 1996 (PWA 1996). On appeal to the High Court, Mrs Justice Foster decided that PWA 1996 did not apply and the parties could not give the court jurisdiction under the PWA 1996 by agreement. Nevertheless, the parties could still bring their dispute to court because the terms of a Tomlin order constitute a contract, therefore the parties can have recourse to the county court under a contractual claim. Written by Alexander Campbell, barrister at Cornerstone Barristers.

In general, there is a clear policy preference favouring the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards in the United States of America (US). This pro-enforcement preference extends to awards made under the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards signed 10 June 1958 (the New York Convention). Under the New York Convention arbitral awards are presumptively enforceable, subject to narrow defences, which are typically limited to the defences to enforcement found in the Convention itself. Practitioners must be aware of potential pitfalls in enforcement and seek skilled counsel for complex issues, particularly those involving personal or quasi in rem jurisdiction, forum non conveniens, and state immunity. In all cases, parties should consult counsel for guidance on local rules and procedure and to ascertain the latest case law on specific New York Convention enforcement actions. For guidance on the defences to enforcement in the US, see Practice

The purpose of this Practice Note is to provide an overview of enforcement practice that creditors may undertake when enforcing judgment debts arising from consumer credit transactions. More detailed advice is contained within the Dispute Resolution module. General A client who successfully proceeds against a debtor through the courts will usually assume that the debtor will comply with the judgment or order obtained. However, unsuccessful parties do not always comply. Generally, a judgment creditor expects to receive payment of moneys due, the delivery up of goods or some other form of mandatory or injunctive relief granted by the courts. A successful judgment creditor may seek to enforce its judgment by way of compensation or recovery of a debt together with the costs of enforcement. The onus is, therefore, on the judgment creditor to ensure compliance. The methods of enforcement available to a judgment creditor are set out in Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR), SI 1998/3132, CPR 70. Enforcement proceedings are brought by application to the courts. The CPR on enforcement are numerous and sometimes

This Practice Note provides guidance on the interpretation and application of the relevant provisions of the CPR. Depending on the court in which your matter is proceeding, you may also need to be mindful of additional provisions—see further below. CPR 83 provisions regarding writs and warrants CPR 83 and CPR PD 83 contain rules governing writs and warrants, including for delivery of goods and for possession of land. For general guidance on CPR 83, see Practice Note: How to obtain a warrant of delivery. For specific guidance on writs and warrants for seizing a debtor's goods to satisfy a judgment debt, see: Taking control of the debtor's goods—overview. For specific guidance on writs and warrants for the possession of land, see Practice Note: Enforcing a judgment or order for possession of land. Enforcement in the High Court of a judgment or order for the delivery of goods Where you have obtained a judgment or order for the delivery of goods and the order does not give the other party the alternative

CPR 83 provisions regarding writs and warrants CPR 83 and CPR PD 83 contain rules governing the issue of writs and warrants For general guidance on CPR 83, see Practice Note: Writs and warrants to enforce judgment—general provisions. This Practice Note provides guidance on the interpretation and application of the relevant provisions of the CPR and relevant legislation. Depending on the court in which your matter is proceeding, you may also need to be mindful of additional provisions—see further below. For specific guidance on writs and warrants for seizing a debtor's goods to satisfy a judgment debt, see: Taking control of the debtor's goods—overview. For specific guidance on writs and warrants for the delivery up of goods, see Practice Note: Enforcing a judgment or order for delivery up. For guidance on CPR 55 and the recovery of possession of land claims, see Practice Notes: CPR 55 procedure in relation to commercial property and Squatters—possession proceedings. Enforcement in the High Court of a judgment

This Practice Note considers the procedure for enforcing a judgment or order for possession of land. This can be either by High Court writ for possession or by County Court warrant for possession; with reference to CPR 83 and CPR PD 83. CPR 83 provisions regarding writs and warrants CPR 83 and CPR PD 83 contain rules governing the issue of writs and warrants. For general guidance on CPR 83, see Practice Note: How to obtain a warrant of delivery. For guidance on CPR 55 and claims for possession generally, see Practice Note: Possession proceedings. Enforcement in the High Court—writ of possession Where you have obtained a judgment or order for possession of land, it may be enforced in the High Court by any of the following: • a writ of possession • proceedings for contempt of court under CPR 81 • where no such proceedings are brought, by a writ of sequestration In relation to CPR 81, see: Contempt and committal—overview. In relation to writs of sequestration,

This Practice Note explains the differences between the High Court and County Court when seeking to enforce a judgment or order for payment of a sum of money (a money judgment). It then sets out the procedure for enforcing a County Court money judgment in the High Court and for enforcing a High Court money judgment in the County Court. This Practice Note provides guidance on the interpretation and application of the relevant provisions of the CPR. Depending on the court in which your matter is proceeding, you may also need to be mindful of additional provisions—see further in the section Court specific guidance below. The differences in enforcement jurisdiction and procedure between High Court and County Court As explained further below, once you have obtained a judgment or order for payment of a sum of money it is possible to transfer between the High Court and the County Court for the purposes of enforcement. This begs the question—why choose one court for enforcement over the other? In order to assist in deciding

This Practice Note considers how to enforce a settlement agreement concluded before a claim has been issued. Unlike a settlement of a dispute arrived at after a claim has been issued, where the parties agree to settle their dispute before a claim has been issued, there is nothing to be stayed or terminated. This means that there will not generally be a requirement for a judgment or order. The issues arising on enforcement of the terms of the settlement therefore differ. If a claim has been issued, however, see Practice Note: Enforcing settlement agreements concluded after proceedings have commenced. How did the parties conclude their pre-action settlement? The parties will have entered into a settlement contract by any of the following methods: • by executed agreement in a contractual document • by deed • by a binding exchange of emails or letters • by offer and acceptance under CPR 36 (a pre-action Part 36 offer) Enforcement of an executed agreement in a contractual document Where, pre-action, the parties have

This Practice Note guides users through the process of enforcing a warrant of control obtained from the County Court as a method of enforcing a money judgment. It is a process by which the judgment creditor instructs a county court bailiff (CCB) to take control of (seize) the judgment debtor’s goods and sell them, keeping the proceeds of sale to discharge the judgment debt. The detail of the process described in this Practice Note is found in the various pieces of legislation underpinning the Taking Control of Goods procedure—for guidance on this legislation, see Practice Note: Finding your way through the Taking Control of Goods legislation. Generally speaking the practitioner should consider which form of enforcement will be the most effective for the judgment creditor. For debts over £600 many judgment creditors have a preference to instruct a HCEO, who is a private individual authorised by the Lord Chancellors office, instead of a CCB, who is a salaried civil servant in the employ of the Ministry of Justice. For guidance

This Practice Note guides users through the process of enforcing a writ of control obtained from the High Court as a method of enforcing a money judgment whereby the judgment creditor takes control (seizes) the judgment debtor’s goods and sells them, keeping the proceeds of sale in discharge of the judgment debt. The detail of the process described in this Practice Note is found in the various pieces of legislation underpinning the Taking Control of Goods procedure—for guidance on this legislation, see Practice Note: Finding your way through the Taking Control of Goods legislation. The recovery of a debt via a High Court Enforcement Officer (HCEO) is split into four stages, with fees assigned to each stage. The HCEO is entitled to claim certain fixed fees which are detailed in The Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014, SI 2014/1 (Fees Regulations)—see Practice Note: Taking control of goods—fees of the enforcement agent. Note: this Practice Note is concerned with the enforcement of writs of control. Although much of the process regarding

This Practice Note answers some of the more frequently asked questions judgment creditors may ask their solicitors when using the Taking Control of Goods procedure in the High Court to enforce an unpaid judgment or order. I have a judgment which the debtor has not paid—what are my options? There are several options available to creditors to try and recover their money. If the judgment debtor has tangible assets, by far the most cost effective and quickest method is to use High Court Enforcement Officers (HCEOs). For further guidance on which enforcement method to choose, see Practice Notes: • Which enforcement of judgment method should I choose? • I have obtained County Court judgment for £4,000—what are my options? • I have obtained High Court judgment for £100,000—what are my options? I have chosen to instruct a High Court Enforcement officer to enforce by taking control of the judgment debtor's goods—what do I do now? If the judgment or order was obtained in the County Court it will