Глобальный кодекс принудительного исполнения
.pdf
Статьи Глобального кодекса принудительного исполнения
Часть 4
оСноВнЫе ПринЦиПЫ ПриМенениЯ Мер ПринУдиТеЛЬноГо иСПоЛнениЯ
Статья 25. имущество, на которое не может быть обращено взыскание
Взыскание может быть обращено на все имущество должника, за исключением имущества, обладающего иммунитетом от взыскания в соответствии с нормами национального права. При обращении взыскания на денежные средства на банковских счетах необходимо оставлять на счете должника определенную сумму, на которую не может быть обращено взыскание, в целях обеспечения средств к существованию должника и его семьи, размер которых установлен законом.
Статья 26. иммунитет
Вопрос иммунитета должен быть четко разрешен в национальном праве, в частности в отношении государства и публичных образований, а также в отношении дипломатических лиц.
Статья 27. Соразмерность мер принудительного исполнения
Меры принудительного исполнения должны быть соразмерны объему требований взыскателя. В случае злоупотребления правом на взыскателя может быть возложена обязанность по возмещению вреда.
Статья 28. автономия судебного исполнителя и иного лица, уполномоченного на принудительное исполнение
Судебный исполнитель или иное лицо, уполномоченное на принудительное исполнение, применяет только те меры, которые в наибольшей степени отвечают интересам взыскателя и основным правам должника.
101
Глобальный кодекс принудительного исполнения
Статья 29. Гибкость мер принудительного исполнения
Государства должны организовать системы принудительного исполнения таким образом, чтобы они соответствовали как интересам взыскателя, так и экономическому и социальному положению должника. По этой причине они должны предусматривать ряд различных мер принудительного исполнения, с тем чтобы судебный исполнитель или иное лицо, уполномоченное на принудительное исполнение, могли выбирать среди них наиболее соответствующую всем обстоятельствам дела.
Статья 30. Гибкость процедуры принудительного исполнения в зависимости от природы имущества
Государства должны гарантировать, чтобы меры принудительного исполнения соответствовали правовому статусу имущества должника, на которое обращается взыскание.
Статья 31. исполнение в натуре
Если судья непосредственно предписывает исполнение или неисполнение обязательств, он должен вместе с вынесением судебного решения также избрать меру принуждения.
Статья 32. ограничение личных прав должника или его семьи
Государства должны гарантировать, чтобы принудительное исполнение в отношении лица соответствовало международным конвенциям, хартиям и декларациям.
Лишение свободы за долги по гражданско-правовым обязательствам запрещено.
Принудительное исполнение в отношении членов семьи должника запрещено, и приоритет интересов ребенка должен соблюдаться.
102
Статьи Глобального кодекса принудительного исполнения
Часть 5
оСноВнЫе ПринЦиПЫ ПриМенениЯ оБеСПеЧиТеЛЬнЫХ Мер
Статья 33. Право на обеспечительные или временные меры
Каждый взыскатель, представивший соответствующие доказательства угрозы неисполнения требований, вправе обратиться в суд с заявлением о применении обеспечительных или временных мер в целях обеспечения защиты своих прав.
Взыскатель, обладающий исполнительным документом, вправе обращаться к применению обеспечительных или временных мер без разрешения суда.
Статья 34. Процедура
Безотлагательная процедура должна быть установлена таким образом, чтобы у суда сохранялась возможность установления замораживающих или обеспечительных мер. Действие данных мер должно быть ограничено во времени.
Процедура по применению обеспечительных или временных мер не должна быть состязательной. Лицо, в отношении которого устанавливается подобная мера, вправе оспорить ее без отлагательств, используя упрощенные средства обращения к суду.
Если суд посчитает, что установленная мера является необоснованной, сторона, которая обратилась в суд и добилась применения данной меры, должна полностью возместить ущерб другой стороне.
THE GLOBAL CODE OF ENFORCEMENT
The work was carried out by the Scientific Council of the UIHJ:
●Nadhir Ben Ammou, professor at the University of Tunis (Tunisia);
●Robert Emerson, professor of Business Law, Warrington College of Business Administration, University of Florida (USA);
●Frédérique Ferrand, professor at the University Jean Moulin Lyon III (France);
●Natalie Fricero, professor at the University of Nice (France);
●Burkhard Hess, professor at the Universities of Tubingen and Heidelberg (Germany), Director of the Max Planck Institute Luxembourg;
●Ton Jongbloed, professor at the University of Utrecht (the Netherlands);
●Aida Kemelmajer de Carlucci, professor at the University of Mendoza (Argentina);
●Joan Les, professor at the University of Sibiu (Romania);
●Jacqueline Lohouès-Oble, professor at the University of Cocody (Ivory Coast);
●Paula Meira Lourenco, assistant-professor at the University of Lisbon (Portugal);
●Pimonrat Vattanahatai, Senior Judge at the Court of Appeal of Bangkok (Thailand);
●Vladimir Yarkov, professor at the University of Ural Ekaterinburg (Russian Federation).
Natalie Fricero and Leo Netten, President of the UIHJ, chaired the
work of the Scientific Council of the UIHJ with the participation of Jacques Isnard, former President of the UIHJ, and Françoise Andrieux, General Secretary of the UIHJ.
The authors would like to thank Bernard Menirt, 1st vice-President of the UIHJ, Mathieu Chardon and Jos Uitdehaag, First Secretaries of the UIHJ, as well as Sue Collins, Marc Schmitz and David Walker Members of the board of the UIHJ, for their assistance.
The authors would like specially to thank John Stacey, President of the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ), for his precious guidance.
There is no State without law, no law without judges, and no judgement without judicial officers.
Jacques Isnard, opening address at the19th Washington congress, 2006 (Harmonization of enforcement procedures in an area of justice with no boundaries, EJT, coll. Passerelle 2007)
Far from being in the completion, we are in the beginning, in the improvement and in the consolidation of all actions carried out for many years.
Leo Netten, President of the UIHJ, A Word from the President, UIHJ Newsletter, April 2012
The International Union of Judicial Officers (Union internationale des huissiers de justice – UIHJ) was established in 1952. Nowadays there are 85 member countries. Its mission is to represent its members with respect to international organizations and to bring about cooperation with professional organizations at national level. It contributes to the improvement of national legal procedures and international agreements. It works to promote the ideas, projects and initiatives aimed at advancing and improving the independent status of the judicial officer.
The UIHJ is a member of the United Nations Economic and Social Council. It participates in the work of the Hague Conference on Private International Law, particularly in the preparation of conventions relating to the service and notification of judicial documents and enforcement. It is a permanent observing member of the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) of the Council of Europe and has in this capacity taken an active part in the drafting of the Guidelines of 17 December 2009 on the enforcement of judicial decisions. It participated in the work that led to the revision of Council Regulation (EC) No 1348/2000 of 29 May 2000 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters. It was involved in the process of reflection aimed at opening the legal professions to the European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters. Furthermore it contributes to the work of the Justice Forum established by the European Commission as well as to the group set up to think about e-Justice.
105
The Global Code of Enforcement
After playing an active part in the creation of the profession of independent judicial officer in Central and Eastern Europe, it has concentrated in particular on establishing throughout Africa a profession with proper legal status and getting the process moving.
The UIHJ is also active in the Americas, particularly in the USA, in South America and in the Caribbean zone. At present and looking forward the UIHJ is extending its contacts with Asian countries with a view to persuading them to join the ranks of the existing member organizations.
In a world dominated by economic concerns, it is important that legal professionals play their role by strengthening the presence and prestige of the law.
With respect to the law of enforcement, the UIHJ hopes to make its experience and influence available in order to ensure the effectiveness of judicial decisions wherever possible.
Every three years the UIHJ organizes an international congress, which provides an occasion to reflect upon and discuss future developments.
In Tunis in 2003 the theme of the congress was: «Globalization of Law in a Universal Area of Justice» and the UIHJ committed to the implementation of a global area of justice.
During the three years following this congress, the works were refined in order to concentrate on the law of enforcement, which thus naturally led to the theme of the Washington congress of 2006. This was: «Harmonization of enforcement procedures in an area of justice with no boundaries» and cleared the way for the birth of a Global Code of Enforcement.
The foundations of a global harmonization of the rules of enforcement had been laid. For several years the UIHJ has been working on the construction of a set of norms and standards that would give all states simple and effective rules that would allow all legal systems to use a common language.
Preambule
THINKING ABOUT ENFORCEMENT
IN THE 21ST CENTURY
I.bIrth of the Project – an Idea, an achIevement
A. Definition of the «Global Code of Enforcement» and its objectives
As conceived of by the UIHJ, the Global Code of Enforcement contains the definition of a set of practices that allow the enforcement of enforceable titles to be structured. In accordance with the definition adopted by Recommendation Rec (2003) 17 of 9 September 2003 of the Council of Europe, enforcement means «the putting into effect of judicial decisions, and also other judicial or non-judicial enforceable titles in compliance with the law which compels the defendant to do, to refrain from doing or to pay what has been adjudged». The Global Code of Enforcement concerns the principles that must govern the various procedures making it possible to constrain, under legal conditions, a person to put the executory title into effect. These principles must be universally recognized. The object has not been the elaboration of a Code comprising specific technical rules for organizing all the methods of enforcement in detail, for two essential reasons:
●First of all, enforcement touches on the sovereignty of each State, Under a principle of international law, every State has the monopoly on constraint in its own territory, and only the authorities designated by the State are empowered to enforce a writ of constraint. In view of the territorial nature of the power of constraint, enforcement is carried out in principle on the territory of a State if the judgment debtor possesses goods on that territory and exclusively in accordance with the procedures provided for by that State (certain conservatory measures may have an extra-territorial effect, such as the «Mareva» injunction (or freezing order), which forbids a person from
performing certain actions on his goods on pain of being penalized, which for example has been recognized by the French Court of Cassation, 1st Civil Chamber 30 June 2004 (Bulletin No 191).
●Furthermore, civil enforcement procedures comprise cultural, social and economic aspects that make it necessary to respect specific national particularities. The behaviour of debtors, the contents of the individual’s estate is not always the same in all countries (in some countries, the car is
107
The Global Code of Enforcement
a frequent and important item of property, in others it is the bank account, while in others it is land). Even the definition of a good itself differs from state to state (movable or immovable goods/tangible or intangible property, do not always mean exactly the same thing, some of them may be registered, others not).
Consequently, the task has been to find and define a coherent set of principles common to all systems for enforcing enforceable titles. These principles make it possible to define certain ideal enforcement procedures. They should be capable of being implemented regardless of the system in effect in the state. For example there is a principle according to which the creditor who is the holder of an enforceable title may seize all the goods belonging to his debtor without waiting and without being required to start new proceedings for enforcement. It is the task of each state to define the procedures for such seizures on the basis of this principle.
The Global Code of Enforcement comprises the definition of the worldwide standards for enforcement essential for promoting an equitable and effective enforcement system:
●Part I defines the «Fundamental principles»;
●Part 2 defines the «Enforcement agents»;
●Part 3 defines the «Judicial authorities»;
●Part 4 defines the «Provisions common to enforcement measures»;
●Part 5 defines the «Provisions common to provisional measures». The Code only concerns enforcement procedures for enforceable titles
of a judicial nature. It excludes all «collective procedures» aimed at realizing the assets of a commercial debtor while protecting the employees; it also excludes procedures aimed at collection via public agencies and enforcement in criminal matters. These other forms of enforcement must comply with different rules and cannot be subjected to the same principles.
B. Methodology
The Global Code of Enforcement is the result of a sustained collective effort by the UIHJ. It represents the points of convergence of all systems of enforcement.
The work was carried out by the Scientific Council of the UIHJ, which consists of university professors, senior judges, lawyers specializing in international law, all having experience dealing with enforcement professionals. Its composition is designed to represent the geographic expression of the UIHJ.
108
Preambule
It is entirely justified that the UIHJ should pursue this project.
●First of all, judicial officers and enforcement agents are the persons who usually have the monopoly on enforcement, which is granted to them by the State. Their essential role in implementing enforcement procedures enables them to understand the problems and to propose relevant solutions. The UIHJ brings judicial officers together from a highly divergent set of legal systems. This in itself is a significant strength when it comes to considering the «global» principles of enforcement (it may be recalled that the UIHJ counts 85 states on four continents with a wide range of legal traditions).
●Apart from this the UIHJ has always been a driving force in the work of researching enforcement, Numerous papers have already been published (on service of documents, the document initiating proceedings, the harmonization of enforcement procedures, etc.), while various colloquia have led to the formulation of proposals and have had a notable impact on legislative developments, particularly on European Union law and the law of the Council of Europe (for example the guidelines of the Council of Europe on enforcement were largely inspired by solutions suggested by this work).
In this way the Washington International Congress of Judicial Officers of April 2006 organized by the UIHJ embarked on the process of thinking about «Towards a Global Code of Enforcement» and defined the objectives of such a «Code», where this would have to meet the standards of legal safety, economic effectiveness, harmonize the rules of enforcement with a view to strengthening a space of liberty, safety, and global justice in order to respond to the globalization of trade, and promote a body of professional rules and professional ethics for enforcement that transcends national boundaries.
The work of the Cape Town Congress of Judicial Officers of May 2012 made it possible, with the help of a questionnaire developed by the UIHJ, to gain a greater knowledge of the role and status of the enforcement agent throughout the world. The Madrid Congress of the International Union to be held in 2015 will see the finalization of this work.
The Scientific Council of the UIHJ is in charge of the works under the chair of Natalie Fricero worked in three stages.
1. Knowledge
It was necessary to inventorize the systems currently in use for enforcement. The diverse composition of the Scientific Council of the UIHJ made it possible to get a very complete picture. Each member the Scientific Council was asked to make investigations in a neighbouring country so that the study could deal with the essential aspects of the legal systems.
109
The Global Code of Enforcement
2. Understanding
This inventorization of systems provided in turn the tools that allowed the analysis and classification of different «families» of enforcement law. For example, what are the essential principles of enforcement law? Who are the actors involved in the enforcement (judges, judicial officers, enforcement agents, etc.)?
3. Action
The analysis allowed us to distinguish standards and principles that could be reasonably considered to be universally applicable. These principles were discussed and approved at the most recent meeting of the Scientific Council of the UIHJ, which was held in Luxembourg on 10 July 2014.
II. an InnovatIve global code
The Global Code of Enforcement makes it possible to modernize enforcement procedures, adapt them to current economic and social concerns, make them fair and compatible with human rights. This is a process of harmonizing the diversity, reducing divergence, while maintaining the «multicultural character of enforcement».
How is the Code innovative?
1. A new balance between the rights of the creditor and the protection of
the fundamental rights of the debtor.
Enforcement law must not be inhumane: its structuring principles must be able to guarantee the payment of the creditor while still protecting the fundamental rights of the debtor. The Code defines the rights and duties of each of the parties.
Rights of the creditor: a right of general security on all of the goods, the ability to invoke measures appropriate to the nature of the goods, the freedom to choose enforcement measures, the right to receive the assistance of the State to enforce judgments, the award of compensation and interest in the event of unjustified resistance by the debtor.
Rights of the debtor: the protection of privacy and the family, the protection of certain goods that cannot be seized, the granting of procedural rights (rights of defence, recourse to the courts in the event of difficulty), the ability to benefit from a period of grace, the right to compensation in the event of incorrect enforcement, the right to participate in the definition of enforcement procedures (participatory enforcement, amicable enforcement
110