This Practice Note sets out frequently asked questions raised by judgment debtors who are subject to the Taking Control of Goods procedure for enforcement of a judgment debt. However, those acting for judgment creditors will also find this list of questions of use in answering queries that their judgment-creditor clients have when anxious to understand how the process works. Do Enforcement Agents (EAs) have to tell me they are coming? The EA must send you a Notice of Enforcement giving you seven clear days to pay your debt in full. If payment is not received in full the EA can visit to take control of your goods. This will incur further fees for which you will be liable. Can I pay some of the debt now and the rest in instalments? In order to prevent an EA from visiting, you need to pay the debt in full. If you cannot pay the full amount and you wish to pay by instalments the EA will visit you to take control of

This Practice Note looks at the most common method of enforcement of an adjudication decision—bringing a Part 7 claim and a summary judgment application in the TCC, as provided for in section 10 of the TCC Guide. It also considers the ability to enforce a decision by seeking a mandatory injunction and the effect of a foreign jurisdiction clause on adjudication enforcement proceedings. Although a Part 7 claim is the normal, and preferable, method of enforcement of an adjudication decision, there are some rarely used alternative methods for enforcement. Parties can apply to the TCC for declaratory relief under CPR Part 8 if there is unlikely to be a substantial dispute of fact and no monetary judgment is sought—see Practice Note: Adjudication and Part 8 proceedings. In some circumstances it may be possible to use insolvency proceedings to enforce the decision of an adjudicator,—see Practice Note: Adjudication enforcement—use of insolvency proceedings. Why enforcement is necessary Under the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (HGCRA 1996), a valid adjudicator’s decision is binding and

This Practice Note looks at the methods of enforcement of an adjudication decision in Scotland, and the associated procedural issues that are most commonly encountered. Why enforcement is necessary Under the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (HGCRA 1996), a valid adjudicator’s decision is binding and enforceable unless and until the dispute is finally resolved (see Practice Note: Adjudication decision). However, an adjudicator’s decision does not have the status of a judgment, so, if the unsuccessful party fails to comply with any part of it, the decision cannot be enforced in the same way. Accordingly, to enforce an adjudicator’s decision in Scotland, the successful party must bring enforcement proceedings in the Court of Session or Sheriff Court to obtain a court judgment on the adjudicator’s decision, which judgment can then be enforced. In Scottish court proceedings, the party raising the enforcement proceedings is the ‘pursuer’ (ie claimant), and the party against whom they are commenced is the ‘defender’ (ie defendant). Selection of Court and Procedural Rules Court of Session Jurisdiction In order to commence proceedings

Property analysis: David McGuirk, partner at Eversheds Sutherland, and Anna Bevan-Jones, principal associate at the firm, examine the High Court’s decision in Eason v Wong and suggest the case helps to clarify a number of points that arise from the principle that purchasers who have paid any part of the purchase money pursuant to a sale contract could be entitled to an equitable lien over the property.

This Practice Note explains when the court can make an order for the sale of property in proceedings under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) or the Civil Partnership Act 2004 (CPA 2004) and practical considerations when seeking a sale. It also sets out the limited routes by which an interim order for sale may be sought and the steps to be taken where one party fails to execute a conveyance together with the procedure to be followed. By virtue of MCA 1973, s 24A (and the Civil Partnership Act 2004 equivalent), the court can make an order for the sale of property (real property or personal property, eg a car (Joy v Joy-Morancho (No 2))) provided that a legal services payment order, a lump sum, property adjustment or secured periodical payments order is also made. The order for sale may be made at the same time as the order to which it is an adjunct or at any time thereafter. Such an order may be made in relation to a property in which

This Practice Note considers the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards under Austrian law. Note: The decisions of the Austrian Supreme Court (Oberster Gerichtshof) (OGH) referred to below are not reported by LexisNexis®. The legal framework for the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Austria is comprised of national statutes, international treaties and bilateral and multilateral agreements. Two national statutes are of importance: the Austrian Enforcement Act (AEA) and the Austrian Code of Civil Procedure (ACCP) which contains provisions on Austrian arbitration law. ACCP, s 614 is the provision relevant for the recognition and declaration of enforceability of foreign arbitral awards, ie those rendered by arbitral tribunals having their seats outside Austria: • the recognition and declaration of enforceability of foreign arbitral awards shall be made in accordance with the provisions of the Enforcement Act (Exekutionsordnung), unless otherwise provided in international law or in legal instruments of the EU. The requirements as to form in respect of the arbitration agreement shall also be deemed to be fulfilled

Note: Brazil judgments below are not reported by LexisNexis®. What constitutes a foreign arbitral award in Brazil? The Brazilian Arbitration Act (Federal Law No. 9,307/96, (BAA)) distinguishes between two types of arbitral awards: domestic and foreign. Foreign arbitral awards are those rendered outside Brazil (BAA, art 34, para 1), and require recognition before enforcement in Brazil. Domestic arbitral awards are those rendered in Brazil and can be enforced as a domestic judgment without the need of any court confirmation. Therefore, for the purposes of recognition and enforcement of foreign awards, the seat of arbitration plays an important role in defining where the award is rendered and whether it needs confirmation before enforcement in Brazil. How to enforce a foreign arbitral award in Brazil To enforce a foreign arbitral award in Brazil, it must first be submitted to a recognition procedure in the Brazilian Superior Court of Justice (Superior Tribunal de Justiça, (STJ)). The rules and requirements for recognition of foreign arbitral awards are those provided for by

The framework for international arbitration in Canada Canada is a federation comprising ten provinces and three territories. Each province and territory is a common law jurisdiction, with the exception of Quebec, which is a civil law jurisdiction. Federally, and in every common law province and territory, there is specific legislation governing international commercial arbitration: • United Nations Foreign Arbitral Awards Convention Act, RSC 1985, c 16 (2nd Supp) • Commercial Arbitration Act, RSC 1985, c 17 (2nd Supp) • Alberta: International Commercial Arbitration Act, RSA 2000, c I-5 • British Columbia: ◦ International Commercial Arbitration Act, RSBC 1996, c 233 ◦ Foreign Arbitral Awards Act, RSBC 1996, c 154 • Manitoba: International Commercial Arbitration Act, CCSM c C151 • New Brunswick: International Commercial Arbitration Act, RSNB 2011, c 176 • Newfoundland and Labrador: International Commercial Arbitration Act, RSNL 1990, c I-15 • Northwest: International Arbitration Act, RSNWT 1988, c I-6 • Nova Scotia: International Commercial Arbitration Act, RSNC 1989, c 234 • Nunavut: International Commercial Arbitration Act, RSNWT (Nu)

This Practice Note considers the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards in the People’s Republic of China (PRC; China). Note: Chinese court judgments are not reported by LexisNexis® UK. Requirement to comply with the arbitral award under Chinese law Under Chinese law, the parties to an arbitration are required by the Arbitration Law to implement the award (Arbitration Law, art 62, Civil Procedure Law, arts 248 (domestic arbitration) and 287 (foreign related arbitration)). Where there is no time limit for the execution of the award, the parties are required to implement it immediately (Arbitration Law, arts 57 and 62). If the losing party refuses to abide by the terms of the award, including the payment of money or delivery of property, the prevailing party may seek to enforce it in the people’s courts (Arbitration Law, art 62 and Civil Procedure Law, art 248). Grounds for refusal of enforcement by Chinese court An arbitration award is final and the court has no jurisdiction

Note: some of the guidance in this Practice Note was developed from content originally produced in partnership with Professor Robert Merkin and CMS. This Practice Note also includes some practical guidance provided by Richard Power of Fieldfisher and has been substantially maintained by Jeremy Mash, Partner CMS Scope of this Practice Note This Practice Note considers the recognition and enforcement of arbitration awards in England and Wales (England and English are used as convenient shorthand in this Practice Note). Such awards include: • awards made where the seat of the arbitration was England, and • foreign awards, ie awards made where the seat of the arbitration was in a jurisdiction that was not England Foreign awards include: • New York Convention awards, ie awards made where the seat of the arbitration was in states that have adopted the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the New York Convention). The UK ratified the New York Convention and it entered into force for the UK on 23 December 1975—see Practice

This Practice Note sets out the procedure and conditions to obtain the recognition and enforcement of international arbitration awards (ie, international arbitral awards rendered in France and arbitral awards rendered abroad) in France. Note: The French cases referred to below are not reported by LexisNexis® UK. The French provisions governing the recognition and enforcement of international arbitral awards are included in Book IV of the French Code of Civil Procedure (FCCP). Procedure and conditions to obtain the recognition and enforcement of international arbitral awards in France International arbitral awards are enforced by virtue of an enforcement order (ordonnance d’exequatur) issued by the judicial court (tribunal judiciaire) of the place where the award was rendered (for international awards rendered in France) or by the judicial court (tribunal judiciaire) of Paris (for awards rendered abroad). The procedure is conducted on an ex parte basis. Article 1514 of the FCCP provides that an international arbitral award will be recognised

This Practice Note considers the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards in Germany. Note: all German judgments referred to in this Practice Note are not reported by LexisNexis® UK. Produced in partnership with Dr Evgenia Peiffer, Counsel, Susanne Schwalb, Partner and Tom Christopher Pröstler, Partner CMS Berlin. Introduction to enforcement under German arbitration law Germany is a traditionally arbitration-friendly jurisdiction. The German law on arbitration is set out in Book 10 (ss 1025–1066) of the Code of Civil Procedure, the Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO). It is closely modelled on the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Arbitration (the Model Law) and governs both domestic and foreign arbitrations, with only limited differences between the two. Under German law, as in most jurisdictions, the enforcement of arbitral awards is a two-stage process. First, the award must be recognised and declared enforceable by the competent state court, which thereby vests in the award the same effect as a state court judgment would have vis-à-vis the parties.