Recognition of a Foreign Money Judgment
A judgment from a foreign court is not enforceable here on its own terms. It has to be recognized first, and recognition is a question of state law rather than federal law, decided under a uniform act that most legislatures have adopted separately.
The rule in short
The Uniform Foreign-Country Money Judgments Recognition Act, a uniform act adopted state by state, applies to a foreign-country judgment that grants or denies recovery of a sum of money and that is final, conclusive and enforceable under the law of the country that rendered it. Judgments for taxes, fines and penalties and most domestic relations judgments are excluded. A recognized judgment is conclusive to the same extent as a sister state's judgment.
A judgment is an order of the court that made it, and it has no independent force anywhere else. Turning a foreign judgment into something a local sheriff will act on takes two steps: recognition, which decides whether the judgment counts, and enforcement, which decides how it is collected. This article covers the first.
The law that governs recognition
There is no general federal statute on recognizing foreign judgments and no treaty of general application governing United States courts. Recognition is a matter of state law. Most legislatures have adopted the Uniform Foreign-Country Money Judgments Recognition Act, which is a uniform act: drafted once, then enacted separately in each state with its own numbering and occasional local changes.
A federal court sitting in diversity applies the recognition law of the state in which it sits, so the same foreign judgment can meet a different framework in two districts. In a state that has adopted neither the current uniform act nor its predecessor, recognition rests on common law comity.
What the act covers
The act applies to a foreign-country judgment that grants or denies recovery of a sum of money, and that under the law of the country where it was rendered is final, conclusive and enforceable. Each of those words does work. A judgment awarding an injunction is not a money judgment. A judgment that denies recovery is inside the act, which is what makes a foreign defense judgment usable as a bar here.
Finality, conclusiveness and enforceability are measured by the rendering country's law, not by ours. That is a question of foreign law, established under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 44.1 in federal court and by the state's equivalent elsewhere, usually through a declaration from a lawyer qualified in that system.
What is excluded
Three categories are carved out. A judgment for taxes. A judgment that is a fine or other penalty. And a judgment for divorce, support or maintenance, or another judgment in connection with domestic relations. The exclusions are not gaps in the law; each carved-out category has its own machinery.
Support orders travel under a different framework, described in the Hague Maintenance Convention and foreign support orders, and custody orders under the framework in enforcing a custody order from another country. The tax and penalty exclusions reflect a long-standing reluctance to collect another sovereign's revenue or punishment.
Foreign judgments frequently combine compensatory damages with a penalty component, or add a tax element to a commercial award. The exclusion applies to the excluded portion. Where the components can be separated on the face of the judgment, courts recognize the money portion and decline the rest. Where they cannot be separated, the party seeking recognition has a problem of proof rather than a rule against it, and evidence about how the rendering court calculated the award becomes central.
| Type of foreign judgment | Inside the uniform act | Route if outside | Practical difficulty |
|---|---|---|---|
| Money judgment for damages or debt | Yes | Not applicable | Proving finality under the rendering law |
| Judgment denying recovery | Yes | Not applicable | Establishing what it actually decided |
| Fine, penalty or tax | No | Generally unenforceable here | Separating a penal component from a compensatory one |
| Support or custody order | No | Family law conventions and uniform acts | Different bases and different refusal grounds |
| Injunction or specific performance | No | Common law comity | Courts are cautious about supervising foreign conduct |
How recognition is raised, and by when
The act allocates the burden to the party seeking recognition, who must establish that the act applies to the judgment. Where recognition is sought as the object of the proceeding, it is raised by filing an action. Where the judgment is being used defensively or in an existing case, it is raised as a counterclaim, a cross-claim, or an affirmative defense.
There is an outer time limit. An action to recognize a foreign-country judgment must be commenced within the earlier of the period during which the judgment remains effective under the rendering country's law, or a fixed period of years stated in the act. A judgment that has lapsed where it was made cannot be revived here.
What recognition produces
A recognized foreign judgment is conclusive between the parties to the same extent as a judgment of a sister state entitled to full faith and credit, and it is enforceable in the same manner. That is the whole of the effect, and it is substantial: the merits are closed, the debt is established, and the judgment creditor moves to collection.
Recognition is not automatic even for a qualifying judgment. The debtor may raise the objections set out in defenses to recognition of a foreign judgment, of which the most common concerns whether the rendering court had jurisdiction over the defendant at all, a question that mirrors personal jurisdiction over a foreign defendant. What happens after recognition is the subject of enforcing a judgment once it is recognized.
Points to carry away
- Recognition of a foreign money judgment is governed by state law, not by any federal statute.
- The judgment must grant or deny recovery of a sum of money to fall inside the act.
- It must be final, conclusive and enforceable under the rendering country's own law.
- Judgments for taxes, fines and penalties are outside the act, as are most family judgments.
- The party seeking recognition bears the burden of showing the act applies.
- A recognized judgment is conclusive to the same extent as a sister state's judgment.
Questions readers ask
Does a pending appeal abroad stop recognition?
It does not automatically, because finality is measured by the rendering country's law, and in many systems a judgment is enforceable while an appeal is pending. The uniform act addresses the situation directly: a court may stay proceedings on recognition where an appeal is pending or the time for appeal has not expired. The usual outcome is a stay, sometimes conditioned on security, rather than a refusal. A judgment that the rendering system treats as suspended by the appeal is a different matter and is not yet enforceable.
What if the state has not adopted the uniform act?
Recognition then rests on common law comity, which reaches broadly similar results by a less structured route. Courts ask whether the foreign court had jurisdiction, whether the defendant received notice and a fair opportunity to be heard, whether the proceedings were regular, and whether enforcement would offend public policy. The practical differences are the absence of a fixed limitation period and a less predictable allocation of the burden, which makes the analysis more open than under the act.
Are non-money judgments recognized at all?
They fall outside the uniform act, which is confined to judgments granting or denying recovery of a sum of money, but they are not necessarily unenforceable. Injunctions, declaratory judgments and specific performance orders from abroad are addressed through common law comity, where courts have more discretion and are generally more cautious. An order requiring conduct in another country raises supervision problems a money judgment does not, and courts weigh whether they can practically police what they are being asked to enforce.
Sources
- Cornell Legal Information Institute — 28 U.S.C. 1738, State and Territorial Statutes and Judicial ProceedingsThe sister-state full faith and credit standard the uniform act uses as its benchmark.
- Cornell Legal Information Institute — Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 44, Proving an Official RecordHow a foreign judgment is proved: attested copy, final certification, or other admissible evidence.
- Cornell Legal Information Institute — Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 44.1, Determining Foreign LawHow the rendering country's law on finality and enforceability is established in court.
- Cornell Legal Information Institute — Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 69, ExecutionThat execution follows the procedure of the state where the court sits, once recognition is done.
- HCCH — Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters, full textThe treaty framework for recognition where both countries are bound by it.
- HCCH — Judgments Convention, status tableWhich states are bound, which determines whether a treaty route exists at all.
Liberty Law Library is a publication, not a law firm. This article states general rules and cites its sources; it is not advice about any particular case, and the law differs by state and changes over time.
More in Cross-Border Litigation
Suing a Foreign State: Immunity as the Default
The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act makes a foreign state immune from the jurisdiction of federal and state courts except as the statute itself provides, and it is the sole basis for obtaining jurisdiction over a foreign state. A foreign state includes its political subdivisions and its agencies and instrumentalities. Exceptions cover waiver, commercial activity, certain expropriations, property in the United States, some domestic torts, and arbitration.
Forum Objections and Parallel Proceedings Abroad
Forum non conveniens permits a court with jurisdiction to dismiss where an adequate alternative forum exists and the balance of private and public interest factors strongly favors trial there. An alternative forum is adequate where the defendant is amenable to process and the remedy is not so unsatisfactory as to be no remedy at all. A foreign plaintiff's choice of forum receives less deference than a domestic plaintiff's.
The Commercial Activity Exception
A foreign state loses immunity where the action is based upon commercial activity carried on in the United States, upon an act performed here in connection with commercial activity elsewhere, or upon an act outside the United States in connection with commercial activity elsewhere that causes a direct effect here. Commercial character is determined by the nature of the conduct rather than its purpose, following the market-player test in Weltover.