143 KB39 KB201320252021Polajžar, Aljošaštevilka:2letnik:47str. 309-323ISSN:0353-6521COBISSID_HOST:61242627URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-FCPQCRH7slLexperaPodjetje in deloarbitral awardarbitražna razsodbaBruseljska uredba IaBrussels Ia Regulationeksekvaturaexequaturinternational commercial arbitrationjezikovne ovirelinguistic barriersmednarodna gospodarska arbitražamutual trustnačelo medsebojnega zaupanjaNew York ConventionNewyorška konvencijapriznanje in izvršitevrecognition and enforcementPrimerjava postopkov priznanja in izvršitve po Newyorški konvenciji in Bruseljski uredbi Ia|The article compares the systems of recognition and enforcement of court judgments and arbitral awards under the New York Convention (NYC) and the Brussels Ia Regulation (Regulation 1215/2012). We focus on the reasons for refusing recognition and enforcement, and on the analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of both systems. Based on the comparative analysis, we conclude that both instruments promote cross-border enforcement and recognition of decisions. This is evident in the narrow explanation of reasons for refusing recognition and enforcement, and the low number of cases in which refusal is successful. Furthermore, we conclude that Regulation 1215/2012 provides a good example for consideration of further removal of language barriers (requirements for arbitral award translation into the official language of the executing state) under the NYC on the global level. Finally, we propose to consider the abolition of exequatur (following the example of Regulation 1215/2012) under the NYC. An obstacle to this step, however, is the legal limitation of the principle of mutual trust - which is the conceptual basis for the abolition of exequatur - only to the Member States of the European UnionV prispevku primerjamo sistema priznanja in izvršitve odločb po Newyorški konvenciji in Bruseljski uredbi Ia (Uredba 1215/2012). Pri tem se osredotočamo na razloge za zavrnitev priznanja in izvršitve ter analizi prednosti in slabosti obeh sistemov. Na podlagi primerjalne analize ugotavljamo, da oba instrumenta spodbujata čezmejno izvršitev in priznanje odločb, kar se kaže v ozki razlagi razlogov za zavrnitev priznanja in izvršitve ter majhnega števila primerov, v katerih je zavrnitev uspešna. Nadalje zaključujemo, da Uredba 1215/2012 ponuja dober zgled za premislek o dodatni odpravi jezikovnih ovir (zahteve po prevodu v uradni jezik države izvršbe) po Newyorški konvenciji na svetovni ravni. Nazadnje predlagamo razmislek o odpravi eksekvature (po zgledu Uredbe 1215/2012) v okviru Newyorške konvencije. Ovira za ta korak pa je pravna omejenost načela medsebojnega zaupanja (mutual trust) - ki je idejna podlaga za odpravo eksekvature - le na okvir držav članic Evropske unijeTEXTznanstveno časopisjejournalsSlovenian National E-content AggregatorNational and University Library of Slovenia