Court dismissed enforcement of foreign judgment due to lack of jurisdiction and procedural defects under Estonian law.
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe court dismissed the enforcement application against a foreign judgment holder, citing fundamental procedural flaws in the original proceedings. The applicant argued that the Estonian court lacked jurisdiction and that the defendant was not properly served, while the opposing party contended the judgment was final and binding. The court ruled that without a valid basis for jurisdiction and proper service, the foreign judgment could not be recognized or enforced in Estonia.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 17 ust. 1 k.r.s.; Art. 18 ust. 1 k.r.s.: A foreign judgment cannot be enforced in Estonia if the Estonian court lacked jurisdiction over the defendant or if the defendant was not properly served with the proceedings.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedFull text
! "#$
%&'!"(
!)*!'
+ ",,! -./%0%(12
3$!
3
.#%
!
444%
///5/
/
")$" ) !$ $ !" . )" !
!"
#
" $
%%&%%&'(('&
%)*'(
&
11 $ '6# ! ,") .1 ' ($ $! .1 '!% "$ '$!!'!
!"11 !
!
'6
$
.)
!
"%
"11 #
)2))!$ !&'!"(
$
&' 7))!
!! 2 ")$( )
!))!! +
",, -./%0%(12("6! !! 0 '! ! !!')2!!
! )" !1! 2' !!/
6 )8'!") %(1 !"!"!
'$2 (1 ! $ )" !'$!" ) !$ 6! ! + " '1$(
!$05)()/)&'7))!
!!
(6!)2))!!! 2/
/
5
#!&'!"((+ "$!'$!$
!" '#!" ! $($%"$!))#!!')2$)2$ $ !99:1!
')2$!'#) "!$## "!6$ )6
) !!') + " '$ 2% &' 7))! !! 2
")$(
% $ #% ! + " '$ ")$" ) !$ $
. )" ! $$" $
-
/$ $")$" ) !$ $ (" $! )6 ! )6" $
(12! 1 $ ' !1!! $ ! !1!" $ .99" !
-
$ $ "6('! .6(! $ "$$'6#,,"6! ! $(12
"!!1!"!),,"6! !!!$ $""11 2. )'6(!
$ $ ! !" !1! 2 ! ') '6 ! '6 "11! $$
!" )$"11!!1! 2 $ .
$ #% !&'7))!
!!+ ",,! -
. /%0% (12 ) (6!) /
/ 2 !$ $ '6"$ !
")$" ) !$ $ . )" !!$ ) /
" !
'$ $$ 5
%. )" $" !1! 2)"99)
2(1!#+ "'$ ")$" ) !$ $ !" . )" !
&'7))!
!! )
(12$"!
$2!#+ "$ % ! -
$2.$ $!! !!1!"%!
(6!" ! ) "99) ' !! " !" ! ( ! ) !!
(6!" ! 2 $) '6"$ !!$ '$ !1! " ) !$ $6. !"
2" !6!!
11)! ! $!$ $(() -!/
$2
!)*!'
!)