Vertaling van "Judgment by default " (Engels → Nederlands) :

judgment by default | judgment given in default of appearance

judgment by default | judgment in absence | judgment in contumacy

application to set aside | application to set aside a judgment by default

judgment of the Court (EU) [ Court of Justice judgment | judgment of the CJEC | judgment of the Court of Justice (EU) | judgment of the EC Court | judgment of the EC Court of Justice ]

financial risk [ credit risk | default risk | exchange risk | foreign exchange rate risk | interest rate risk | liquidity risk | loan risk | macroprudential risk | market risk | sovereign risk | systematic risk | systemic risk ]

appraise debtor's financial situation | check defaulter's financial situation | assess debtor's financial situation | judge debtor's financial situation

ruling [ court decision | court judgment | court ruling ]

apply clinical assessement methods | use clinical judgment techniques | use clinical analyses techniques | use clinical assessment techniques

Event of default

in the case of a request for recovery, the date when the judgment or decision has become enforceable or final, a description of the nature and amount of the administrative penalty and/or fine, any dates relevant to the enforcement process, including whether, and if so how, the judgment or decision has been served on defendant(s) and/or given in default of appearance, a confirmation from the requesting authority that the penalty and/or fine is not subject to any further appeal, and the underlying claim in respect of which the request i ...[+++]s made and its different components.

2. Calls for the requirement for exequatur to be abolished, but considers that this must be balanced by appropriate safeguards designed to protect the rights of the party against whom enforcement is sought; takes the view therefore that provision must be made for an exceptional procedure available in the Member State in which enforcement is sought; considers that this procedure should be available on the application of the party against whom enforcement is sought to the court indicated in the list in Annex III to the Regulation; takes the view that the grounds for an application under this exceptional procedure should be the following: (a) that recognition is manifestly contrary to public policy in the Member State in which recognition is sought; (b) ...[+++]where the judgment was given in default of appearance, that the defendant was not served with the document which instituted the proceedings or with an equivalent document in sufficient time and in such a way as to enable him to arrange for his defence, unless the defendant failed to commence proceedings to challenge the judgment when it was possible for him to do so; (c) that the judgment is irreconcilable with a judgment given in a dispute between the same parties in the Member State in which recognition is sought, and (d) that the judgment is irreconcilable with an earlier judgment given in another Member State or in a third State involving the same cause of action and between the same parties, provided that the earlier judgment fulfils the conditions necessary for its recognition in the Member State addressed; further considers that an application should be able to be made to a judge even before any steps are taken by way of enforcement and that if that judge rules that the application is based on serious grounds, he or she should refer the matter to the court indicated in the list in Annex III for examination on the basis of the grounds set out above; advocates the addition of a recital in the preamble to the ...

2. Calls for the requirement for exequatur to be abolished, but considers that this must be balanced by appropriate safeguards designed to protect the rights of the party against whom enforcement is sought; takes the view therefore that provision must be made for an exceptional procedure available in the Member State in which enforcement is sought; considers that this procedure should be available on the application of the party against whom enforcement is sought to the court indicated in the list in Annex III to the Regulation; takes the view that the grounds for an application under this exceptional procedure should be the following: (a) that recognition is manifestly contrary to public policy in the Member State in which recognition is sought; (b) ...[+++]where the judgment was given in default of appearance, that the defendant was not served with the document which instituted the proceedings or with an equivalent document in sufficient time and in such a way as to enable him to arrange for his defence, unless the defendant failed to commence proceedings to challenge the judgment when it was possible for him to do so; (c) that the judgment is irreconcilable with a judgment given in a dispute between the same parties in the Member State in which recognition is sought, and (d) that the judgment is irreconcilable with an earlier judgment given in another Member State or in a third State involving the same cause of action and between the same parties, provided that the earlier judgment fulfils the conditions necessary for its recognition in the Member State addressed; further considers that an application should be able to be made to a judge even before any steps are taken by way of enforcement and that if that judge rules that the application is based on serious grounds, he or she should refer the matter to the court indicated in the list in Annex III for examination on the basis of the grounds set out above; advocates the addition of a recital in the preamble to the ...

The first judgment, given in default of appearance, was confirmed by another judgment ruling on an appeal brought by the Orams.