j$k1627173j$k
With regard to enforcement, there are two important aspects: is a court decision in Singapore recognized by the courts of the jurisdiction in which the debtor has assets and is a foreign court decision recognized in Singapore? In the absence of a reciprocity agreement between the States concerned, a judgment is binding only in the state of the issuing court. Prior to the CCAA, this was provided for in Singapore by the Reciprocal Enforcement of Commonwealth Judgments Act (“RECJA”) and the Reciprocal Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act (“REFJA”). These statutes provide for the recognition and enforcement of the judgments of the states with which Singapore has contracts. Jurisdiction clauses in contracts are a complex subject and different jurisdictions have different approaches to implementing such clauses. The CCAA thus creates a safer method for the parties to designate the court responsible for contractual disputes. At present, this situation is present with respect to the United Kingdom judgments. Section 3, paragraph 1, of the RECJA provides that a judgment of a UK higher court in Singapore may be registered under RECJA. After registration, such a judgment may be executed in the same manner as a singapore Supreme Court decision. However, if a judgment of the United Kingdom enters the scope of the law, recognition and enforcement must be made by law. It appears that the relevant sentence that led the High Court to find that the applicant should also have received a certified copy of the hearing questions, “including any possible reasons, if any, for the decision of the court that rendered the judgment.” This expression also appears in Article 13, paragraph 1, point a) of the Hague Convention.
With regard to the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments, the law becomes relevant where there is an exclusive court decision or exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of a state contracting the Hague Convention. (b) the High Court is bound by all factual findings of the original court, unless the foreign judgment is late; and the CCAA is a positive and welcome impetus for dispute resolution in Singapore, as it provides the parties with greater security and predictability in the enforcement of judgments rendered in Singapore courts and increases the number of jurisdictions in which such judgments can be enforced. Second, the High Court considered whether the requirement of Order 111 r2 (a) of the court settlement, that an applicant must issue a “full and certified copy of the foreign judgment (including, if applicable, the reasons for the decision of the court rendering the judgment), was satisfied. First, the law applies to judgments obtained by the courts of States Parties to the Hague Convention. A “foreign judgment” is defined as a judgment by a court of a contracting state other than Singapore. A judgment is defined as a “court decision” and includes judgments on the merits, default judgments, approval decisions or costs decisions. However, the High Court found that referrals or interim safeguards and procedural decisions are excluded from the scope of the law. Among its reasons for granting the application for execution, the Tribunal indicated that evidence was provided that the plaintiff was included in the motion for summary sentence when neither the defendant nor his counsel were present. The Tribunal therefore found that the summary judgment against the defendant appeared to be in the nature of a judgment on the merits of the case, contrary to a default judgment.