"So difficult it is to show the various meanings and imperfections of words when we have nothing else but words to do it with.” The latter quote by English philosopher John Locke fittingly describes the frustrations of many lawyers dealing with cross-border cases. A lawyer is required to look beyond the mere naming of a foreign decision. He or she is just as much, if not more so, interested in understanding the legal effects behind the form. Often, lawyers will be barred from this knowledge, simply because they do not know the native language of the State, wherefrom the decision originated. Even where this information is available, it is not uncommon to be lacklustre or to skew the correct meaning due to the various understandings of domestic practitioners and academics. Sometimes, a decision will find an equivalent by name in another State, however, the substantive meaning behind the decision can vastly differ. Therefore, this expert glossary was not set up to provide readers with mere direct translations, but rather, as an attempt to highlight the general features behind the various decisions of project-participating States, as well as two additional States (Bulgaria, North Macedonia). A glossary is nonetheless a shortened dictionary and the function of the latter is to provide succinct definitions of listed terms. For a lawyer, be it a practitioner or academic, having knowledge of foreign enforcement titles and their basic features, is of great importance.

The glossary is subdivided into two major parts. First, the glossary outlines types of domestic decisions, together with an identification of those decisions, corresponding to the concept of “judgement” under the Brussels Ia Regulation (according to domestic theory and practice). This is followed by a general list of enforcement titles under the domestic laws of project-participating States.

GLOSSARY

JUST-AG-2018/JUST-JCOO-AG-2018
Funded by Justice Programme of the European Union