I.  PRESENT ATTITUDE TOWARD ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN MONEY JUDGMENTS

A. Describe the receptiveness of your government (including courts) toward enforcement of foreign money judgments.

The Swedish attitude towards enforcement of foreign money judgments has always been, and still is, very restrictive. Sweden lacks any uniform regulation of the question of enforcement of foreign money judgments. The prospects of enforcement vary greatly, depending on the subject matter of the judgment and on which country has rendered it. The main rule under Swedish international law is that foreign judgments are neither recognized nor enforceable in Sweden. Hence, with few exceptions, enforcement is not granted unless specifically provided for in law. As a rule, these statutory provisions are based on the stipulations of international treaties to which Sweden is a party. If not provided for in special legislation, an international treaty does not per se have an effect upon Swedish law.

During the latest years, the possibilities to enforce judgments originating from the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) states and the European Union (EU) states have been significantly extended. Sweden accessed the Lugano Convention  on January 1, 1993, and the Brussels Convention  on January 1, 1999. The provisions of the conventions of enforcement of foreign money judgments were by this incorporated into Swedish law and will apply to judgments from all states having ratified the conventions. The Lugano Convention of 1988 has later been replaced by the Lugano Convention of 2007. The provisions of the Lugano Convention of 2007 are directly applicable in Sweden since it has been acceded by the EU. The Brussels Convention was on March 1, 2002, superseded by the Brussels I Regulation.  All member-states in the European Union, except Denmark, have adopted the Brussels I Regulation.