RECIPROCITY AS A CONDITION FOR THE RECOGNITION OF FOREIGN COURT DECISIONS: POLITICAL-LEGAL ASPECT AND MODERN SIGNIFICANCE IN DOMESTIC AND COMPARATIVE LAW

Jelena Jakšić

doi:10.5937/spm97-66768

Jelena Jakšić Asistent Pravnog fakulteta Univerziteta u Prištini sa privremenim sedištem u Kosovskoj Mitrovici

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5937/spm97-66768

Ključne reči: recognition of foreign judicial decisions, private international law, factual reciprocity, mutual trust, judicial practice

Sažetak

This paper examines the institute of reciprocity as a condition for the recognition of foreign court decisions, with special reference to Serbian law and comparative legal trends, pointing out its political-legal significance in contemporary relations between states. Reciprocity is analyzed as a traditional mechanism for the protection of state sovereignty and the equality of states, but also as an instrument for regulating international legal cooperation. It starts from the distinction between legal, factual, and presumed reciprocity and their role in ensuring reciprocity in cross-border relations, while indicating a gradual transformation from a formal to a functional approach. The analysis of court practice and comparative law decisions shows an evolution from strict formal to material (factual) reciprocity and an increasingly pronounced tendency for reciprocity to be assumed, instead of being formally proven, whereby the center of gravity increasingly moves towards procedural guarantees, public order, and the principle of mutual trust. Special attention is paid to contemporary solutions in the law of the European Union and other legal systems, as well as the impact of the Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Court Decisions from 2019 [Hague Judgments Convention 2019], which affirms a model based on procedural standards and not on formal reciprocity. Critical analysis shows that formal reciprocity in modern law is gradually losing its role as a general precondition for recognition and is increasingly giving way to functional models, which reflect the need for balancing between the protection of state sovereignty and the strengthening of international cooperation and trust. It is concluded that the domestic legal system already contains elements of this more modern approach, and that further development should be directed towards strengthening convention and supranational mechanisms of recognition, while retaining reciprocity as a subsidiary instrument in the protection of national interests.

Reference

Apelacioni sud u Beogradu [ASB], Gž. 1472/19, 5. decembra 2019. godine.

Apelacioni sud u Beogradu [ASB], Gž. 2611/2021 od 8. septembra 2021. godine, Bilten 12/2022.

Apelacioni sud u Novom Sadu [ASNS], Gž. 3365/2018 od 12. decembra 2018. godine.

Apelacioni sud u Novom Sadu [ASNS], Gž. 3565/2017 od 14. novembra 2017. godine.

Belović, Jelena. 2018. „Priznanje i izvršenje stranih sudskih odluka.” Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Nišu 57 (80): 275–288. DOI:10.5937/zrpfni1880275B

Bogdan, Michael. 2012. Private International Law as Component of the Law of the Forum. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff.

Bonomi, Andrea, and Cristina Mariottini. 2021. Yearbook of Private International Law, Lausanne.

Briggs, Adrian. 2021. Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments.London: Informa Law from Routledge.

Bundesgerichtshof [BGH], Urteil vom 3. Februar 1983 – IX ZR 74/82, NJW 1983, 1559.

Bundesgerichtshof [BGH], Urteil vom 4. Juni 1992 – IX ZR 149/91.

Bundesgerichtshof [BGH], Urteil vom 3. Juli 2003 – IX ZR 302/00.

Bundesgerichtshof [BGH], Beschluss vom 20.06.2018 – XII ZB 285/17.

Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters [Brussels Convention], 27 September 1968, Official Journal L 299, 31.12.1972, p. 32–42.

Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters [Lugano Convention], 16 September 1988, Official Journal L 319, 25.11.1988, p. 9–48.

Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters [Hague Judgments Convention], 2 July 2019.

Cour de cassation, Munzer v. Munzer, 7 janvier 1964, Rev. crit. DIP 1964.

Cour de cassation, Société Prieur, First Civil Chamber, 7 janvier 1981.

Cour de cassation, Simitch, 6 février 1985. n° 83-11.241.

Cour de cassation, Cornelissen, 20 février 2007, n° 05-14.082, Rev. crit. DIP 2007.

Court of Justice of the European Communities [CJEU]. Dieter Krombach v André Bamberski, Case C-7/98, Judgment of the Court of 28 March 2000, ECLI:EU:C:2000:164.

Court of Justice of the European Communities [CJEU], Eurofood IFSC Ltd., Case C-341/04, Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 2 May 2006, ECLI:EU:C:2006:281.

Court of Justice of the European Communities [CJEU], Horst Ludwig Martin Hoffmann v Adelheid Krieg, Case 145/86, Judgment of the Court of 4 February 1988, ECLI:EU:C:1988:61.

Court of Justice of the European Communities [CJEU], Trade Agency Ltd v Seramico Investments Ltd., Case C‑619/10, Judgment of the Court (First Chamber), 6 September 2012, ECLI:EU:C:2012:531.

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit [GIZ]. 2021. Prekogranično priznanje i izvršenje stranih sudskih presuda u Jugoistočnoj Evropi i perspektive Haške Konvencije iz 2019. godine, nacionalni izvještaj. GIZ.

Dicey, Albert Venn, John Humphrey, and Carl Morris. 2000. The Conflict of Laws, 13th ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell.

Elbalti, B. 2008. The role of the reciprocity requirement in the harmonization of standards for the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. Faculté des sciences juridiques, politiques et sociales de Tunis. Retrieved April 29, 2026, from memoireonline.com

Geimer, Reinhold, and Rolf A. Schütze. 2010. Europäisches Zivilverfahrensrecht [European Civil Procedure Law]. Munich: C. H. Beck.

Jovanović, Marko, i Sanja Marjanović. 2024. „Uporedna analiza sistema priznanja stranih sudskih odluka prema Zakonu o rešavanju sukoba zakona sa propisima drugih zemalja i prema Haškoj konvenciji iz 2019. godine.” Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Novom Sadu 58 (4): 925–955. DOI: 10.5937/zrpfns58-54147

Jovičić, Katarina, i Đorđe Marjanović. 2025. „Specifičnosti građanskih postupaka sa stranim elementom i procesni položaj stranih državljana pred domaćim sudovima.” Strani pravni život 69 (2): 311–332. DOI: 10.56461/SPZ_25208KJ

Kitić, Dušan. 2019. Međunarodno privatno pravo. Beograd: Pravni fakultet Univerziteta Union u Beoradu; Javno preduzeće Službeni glasnik.

Legge 31 maggio 1995, n. 218, “Riforma del sistema italiano di diritto internazionale privato”, Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica Italiana, n. 128, 3 giugno 1995.

Marjanović, Sanja. 2019. Međunarodno privatno pravo haških konvencija u Republici Srbiji. Niš: Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Nišu-Centar za publikacije.

Marković-Bajalović, Dijana. 2022. „Sporna pitanja izvršenja stranih sudskih odluka.” U Sudski postupak – Pravda i pravičnost, Zbornik radova 35. Susreta Kopaoničke škole prirodnog prava Slobodan Perović, ur. Jelena S. Perović Vujačić, 477–495. Beograd: Kopaonička škola prirodnog prava – Slobodan Perović.

Ministarstvo pravde Republike Srbije. 2014. Nacrt Zakona o međunarodnom privatnom pravu. Jun 2014. https://www.mpravde.gov.rs

Parisi, Francesco, and Nita Ghei. 2003. „The Role of Reciprocity in International Law.” Cornell International Law Journal 36 (1): 93–123.

Pavić, Vladimir. 2013. Međunarodno privatno pravo. Beograd: Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu.

Privredni apelacioni sud [PAS], Iž. 1019/2018 od 29. marta 2018. godine.

Regulation (EU) No. 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (recast). Official Journal of the European Union, L 351/1.

Regulation (EU) No. 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, Official Journal of the European Union, L 338, 23.12.2003.

Singh, Utkarsha. 2023. “Recognition, Enforcement and Reciprocity.” International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research (IJFMR) (5) 6: 1–8.

Stanivuković, Maja, i Mirko Živković. 2003. Međunarodno privatno pravo – opšti deo, 3. izmenjeno i dopunjeno izdanje. Beograd: Službeni glasnik.

Stanivuković, Maja. 2014. „Idealizam i realizam u priznavanju stranih sudskih odluka.” Pravni život 11: 283–298.

Stevens, Susan L. 2002. “Commanding International Judicial Respect: Reciprocity and the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments.” Hastings International and Comparative Law Review (26) 1: 115–158.

Stojanović, Ljiljana. 2009. „Priznanje stranih sudskih odluka u uporednom pravu.” Doktorska disertacija. Univerzitet u Beogradu: Pravni fakultet.

Supreme Court of the United States [SCOTUS], Hilton v. Guyot, 159 U.S. 113 (1895), Argued April 10, 1894, Decided June 3, 1895.

Vrhovni kasacioni sud [VKS], Prev. 123/2015 od 12. novembra 2015. godine.

Vrhovni kasacioni sud [VKS], Rev. 1695/2019 od 11. marta 2020. godine.

Vrhovni kasacioni sud [VKS], Rev. 2658/2020 od 8. jula 2020. godine.

Vrhovni kasacioni sud [VKS], Rev. 3410/2020 od 21. oktobra 2020. godine.

Vrhovni sud Srbije [Vrhovni sud], Prev. 217/93 od 26. oktobra 1994. godine.

Vrhovni sud Srbije [Vrhovni sud], Prev. 210/99 od 20. oktobra 1999. godine.

Zakon o međunarodnom privatnom pravu [ZMPP], „Narodne novine”, 101/2017, 67/2023.

Zakon o rešavanju sukoba zakona sa propisima drugih zemalja [ZRSZ], „Službeni list SFRJ”, br. 43/82 i 72/82 - ispr., „Službeni list SRJ”, br. 46/96 i „Službeni glasnik RS”, br. 46/2006 - dr. zakon.

Zivilprozessordnung [ZPO], "Bundesgesetzblatt I S. 3202." Last accessed 25 April 2026. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/zpo/