Court dismissed enforcement of foreign judgment due to lack of jurisdiction and procedural defects in the original proceedings.
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe court dismissed the enforcement application against a foreign judgment rendered in 2008. The applicant argued that the foreign court had proper jurisdiction, but the respondent contended that the proceedings were procedurally flawed and violated fundamental rights. The court ruled that the foreign judgment was not final and binding, and the domestic court lacked jurisdiction to enforce it under the relevant international treaties.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 17 ust. 1 k.r.s.; Art. 24 of the Convention on the Enforcement of Foreign Judgments: A foreign judgment cannot be enforced in Estonia if the judgment has not become final and binding in the country of origin or if the enforcing court lacks jurisdiction.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedFull text
!"#
$%&%
'#
!%%$%(%%)*++,+,-,.#*/
&%'%#%#)0!%%$%#
"%)
%
)%
%1
0
#&%%
, ')) $" !#%%23% ,,, 1 (&&4
-55 +,/!%%$%#"%)%0%6%5
%0%1(#%/2&
')) $" !#%%23% ,, 1 (&&4
-55,, /!%%$%#"%)%&), 5,%0
%1 (/2&
+ ) !%% $% #%# %# $" !#%%23% !"#
2#%%4%44)%0(/2&%)%#
%#4#+2&4#&&4"%
7#%# % )%# %%#%# $" !#%%23%# !%%
$%)%44%)%
'%)%4#1!%%$%##%%44
&&2%&%%#4!"#2#%%4%4#
&&2#"%%)&&!"#4#,2&4####
)%
!
"#
( /
$" !#%%23% % ,,, 1 (&&4
-55 +,/%%!%%$%#%%#)8+-#1,##%1
%6%5 %1
')"#1%#&%#%#
$"!#%%23%!"#2#%%4,, %%#1
,,--(&&4 -55,, /%%!%%$%#%%#)8
##%1+%6%5,%1
% "#1%# ) ,5 %5 , 5, %5
(, 5,*/%6%
!%% $% % # &% # &&) &4 )5
%) &%% &1 % # 2%)) %1 66)## % # 5 %###
%"2995##2&#&%%))%%1
66)##)#%%)#%1")%#)%1
"#
%#%5#))2"4))4#)#)%#
8 ,, #1 , # % &% &%% #) ##
&& % )% %1 # %)% 8# 5 %
66)# % # % % &&) &4) "% ) %
%&1%4&1%5%&%%&1%#2%))466)##%
#5%###%"299
8 #"%1,+&)5%66)#%##&&)"%"%)
%5)%%154%6#%6%#
62&%%1%#&&62&
!%% $% % # ) &&) &45 %) &%%
&1%#2%))%1#%#5%###%"2995"
4 ## #)) %) )) %15 15 6# %
2&&᭐&%
1 2 66)# & ) $" !#%%23% ,,, 1
&&4 -55 +, "%) % # (*,/ 2& % 4
$"!#%%23%,, 1&&4 -55,, "%)
%&)# (, 5,*: . *,/2&%
$%&%
%