Brussels Convention

Article 38

Untitled

The court with which the appeal under the first paragraph of Article 37 is lodged may, on the application of the appellant, stay the proceedings if an ordinary appeal has been lodged against the judgment in the State which that judgment was given or if the time for such an appeal has not yet expired; in the latter case, the court may specify the time within which such an appeal is to be lodged.

The court may also make enforcement conditional on the provision of such security as it shall determine.

Holdings

/
C-432/9311 Aug 1995

Société d'Informatique Service Réalisation Organisation v Ampersand Software BV

Article 37(2) and the first paragraph of Article 38 of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, as amended by the Convention of 9 October 1978 on the Accession of the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, are to be interpreted as meaning that a decision by which a court of a Contracting State, seised of an appeal against authorization to enforce an enforceable judgment of a court in another Contracting State, refuses a stay or lifts a stay previously ordered cannot be contested by an appeal in cassation or similar form of appeal limited to the examination of points of law only. Moreover, the court seised of such an appeal on a point of law under Article 37(2) of the Convention does not have jurisdiction to impose or reimpose such a stay.

_

C-183/904 Oct 1991

B. J. van Dalfsen and others v B. van Loon and T. Berendsen

1\. The second paragraph of Article 37 of the Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters is to be interpreted as meaning that a decision taken under Article 38 of the Convention by which the court with which an appeal has been lodged against an order for the enforcement of a judgment given in another Contracting State has refused to stay the proceedings and has ordered the party to whom the enforcement order was granted to provide security does not constitute a "judgment given on the appeal" within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 37 of the Convention and may not, therefore, be contested by an appeal in cassation or similar form of appeal. The position is the same where the decision taken under Article 38 of the Convention and the "judgment given on the appeal" within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 37 of the Convention are given in a single judgment.

2\. The first paragraph of Article 38 of the Convention is to be interpreted as meaning that a court with which an appeal is lodged against an order for the enforcement of a judgment given in another Contracting State may take into consideration, in a decision concerning an application for the proceedings to be stayed under that paragraph, only such submissions as the appellant was unable to make before the court of the State in which the judgment was given.

_

C-43/7722 Nov 1977

Industrial Diamond Supplies v Luigi Riva

For Articles 30 and 38, "ordinary appeal" is defined only within the Convention's own system, not by the law of the State where the judgment was given or the law of the State where recognition or enforcement is sought. For Articles 30 and 38, an appeal is an "ordinary appeal" if it may lead to annulment or amendment of the judgment at issue in the recognition or enforcement proceedings and, in the State where that judgment was given, it must be lodged within a legal time limit that starts to run by virtue of that judgment.