Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
International FamiliesMoney, Children & Long-Term Planning
CHILD SUPPORT WORKSHOP
PROGRAM PRODUCER: Ms. Rhiannon Lewis (UK)
PRESENTERS:Hannah Roots (Canada)
Gary Caswell (U.S.)Margaret Campbell Haynes (U.S.)
Philippe Lortie (The Hague)1
Establishment & Enforcement AbroadRecognition & Enforcement of Foreign Orders
Speakers
Hannah RootsManaging Director
British Columbia Maintenance Enforcement Program
Gary Caswell, Esq.Nuñez & Caswell
2
OverviewEstablishment of a child support order
US Law Canadian law and processes Incoming requests for establishment in United States
Enforcement of an existing Child Support order Canadian processes Recognition and enforcement of a foreign order in US
Other Issues Duration of child support Currency Conversion Modification of orders
3
Establishment of Parentage & Child Support in a Foreign Country – U.S. View
IV-D Federal Level Reciprocity http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cse/international/i
ndex.htmlIV-D State Level Reciprocity
TX-Germany, CA-New Zealand, VA-Quebec See, OCSE Intergovernmental Referral Guide for
State Level Reciprocity & Other helpful informationForms & Procedures
Give Foreign Tribunals what they want! (Documents, certificates, translation, foreign currency equivalence)
UIFSA 2001 § 304 (b) – Duties of Initiating Tribunal Future: Hague Transmittal & Country Profiles
4
Establishment of Parentage & Child Support in a Foreign Country – U.S. View Cont’d
Make IV-D Agency do its job! Case Closure Criteria applicable when respondent is in a foreign country
45 CFR CH.III 303.11(B)4: Can close if NCP locate unknown and have made diligent Efforts using Multiple Sources over 3 yrs via Automated Locate (if sufficient info to do Auto-Locate) & 1 yr if only have info for Non-Auto-Locate
45 CFR CH.III 303.11(B)6:The NCP is a citizen of , and lives in, a foreign country, does not work for the Federal government or a company with headquarters or offices in the United States, and has no reachable domestic income or assets; and the State has been unable to establish reciprocity with the country (focus on citizenship, not Reciprocity) If US Citizen, can’t close for lack of reciprocity alone.
5
Establishment of Parentage & Child Support in a Foreign Country – U.S. View Cont’d
If No Reciprocity - Long Arm Factors Is there a Jurisdictional basis for VA to establish
support or determine parentage over a Nonresident Respondent (NR)? UIFSA 2001 §201 bases: NR was personally served in
VA; voluntarily submits to VA Jurisdiction; resided with the child in this state; resided in the state and supported the child; the child resides in this state because of NR’s acts or directives (DV cases?); sex in VA & child may have been conceived as a result; and any other basis which is “constitutional”.
Is Enforcement of resultant Order in U.S. possible? (wage withholding, license revocation, property lien
(cost & logistics of PAT);
6
Establishment of Parentage & Child Support in a Foreign Country – U.S. View Cont’d
Child vs. Debtor-Based Jurisdiction Stalemate Kulko, 436 U.S. 84; 98 S. Ct. 1690 Spring Break Affair in Cancun; CP in TX; AF in Quebec &
never in TX; No TX-QU reciprocity; QU Local Counsel says no Jurisdiction to Establish PAT in QU = Stalemate! (File in TX, Child in TX as a result of AF Acts or Directives? Ask TX IV-D to ask VA IV-D (VA –QU Reciprocity to initiate to QU?)
No Reciprocity + No Long Arm = Foreign Attorney(s) DOS Link for Retaining Foreign Attorneys
Non-Judicial Remedies ADR & Cultural Pressure (Japanese Corps, Ball Clubs)
7
MEXICO
No Federal Reciprocity (despite Fernando Solana ‘92 Declaration re all MX states & URESA/RURESA
No Effective Central Authority AssistanceEnforcement Limited
Wage Withholding (specific to employer) Abandonment
Service of Process: New Developments Hague vs Inter-American;
Exclusivity; PFI; Local Counsel See, Gary Caswell “Judicial Assistance
Conventions in Effect for Mexico and the USA” in course materials.
8
Canadian Family Law Framework In Canada – family law is area of shared responsibility for federal
government and provinces/territories Federal law (Divorce Act ) governs family matters including
child support for parents that were married Provincial law governs all issues arising out of family breakdown
outside marriage (never married, or interim orders before divorce) and property division
Enforcement of child support is exclusively a provincial responsibility (although federal government will enforce against federally regulated assets/income at request of a province)
Provincial/Territorial Interjurisdictional Support Order (ISO) Acts govern cases where one party resides outside province ISO is similar to UIFSA (but not uniform across Canada)
Result is a patchwork of similar but not identical laws respecting family breakdown in Canada
9
Establishing Child Support in CanadaIn terms of substantive law – there are a lot of
similarities between Canadian and American family law
Some differences to be aware of: In Canada – jurisdiction to establish a child support order
can be based on the residence of the custodial parent and the child only (no need for NCP to have had any contact with Canada)
In Canada - Paternity does not have to be specifically established before a child support order can be made. It is up to NCP to raise the issue of paternity if he wants that issue determined, otherwise the support application may proceed without consideration of paternity
10
Forum Considerations :Establishment in Canada or US?Considerations
Cost Very unlikely that legal assistance would available in Canada for
establishment if CP retains local counsel Use of IV-D Agency is cost-free to custodial parent
Time to obtain order Domestic US processes may be faster than Canadian process as
Courts in some provinces are quite backed up A Canadian lawyer may be able to bring the application in a superior
court – which can be much faster than a lower court process in Canada ( Many provincial/ territorial ISO processes use lower court)
Enforceability of order As long as US Court had jurisdiction under US law, the resulting US
order can be enforced in Canada – but it will still have to go through a recognition process in Canada (discussed later)
An order obtained in Canada (whether through IV-D process or through local counsel) can be immediately enforced
11
Paternity EstablishmentISO legislation does not allow a “stand-alone”
paternity determination at request of a foreign applicant – it must be part of an application to establish child support
If request to establish a child support order comes through the IV-D system and NCP challenges paternity (or CP specifically requests establishment of paternity)Designated authority will coordinate paternity testing Processes vary but genetic testing can be done by
agreement or Court order
12
Child Support OrderAll Canadian child support guideline tables use NCP income
to determine child support amount, but provincial/territorial order amounts vary slightly because income tax is taken into account
Order will be made in CANADIAN dollars If establishment request comes through the IV-D system
the order will be sent to local child support program for enforcement if the custodial parent requests
In private cases – the resulting Canadian order can usually be enrolled with the local enforcement program However – some enforcement programs may be reluctant
to let a foreign creditor directly register – check first
13
Establishment in QuebecQuebec has not proclaimed its ISO legislation yet
(anticipated in 2013-2014) Current legislation ( REMO Act) does not allow a
foreign creditor (CP) to request establishment of a child support order
Parent must retain lawyer in Quebec and bring an application before Court in Quebec
May be a consideration in determining whether it would be better to use domestic (US) law to establish the order, and then send the order for enforcement
14
Establishment of PAT & Child Support in U.S. for Foreign Petitioner
IV-D Policy on Direct Applications PIQ 99-01 As of today, Anybody Anywhere can apply for IV-D services
Legal Basis: Why not? Status of the place from which a cp applies for services is irrelevant in an establishment case filed under UIFSA” People ex rel. A.K., 2003 WL NCP = CO, CP = Russia HELD: CO can EST for applicant residing in Russia; CO guidelines may need deviation. Practice Tip: Verify with DOS that providing legal assistance
and facilitating the transfer of money to a N. Korean, Iranian, or Cuban CP does not constitute trading with the enemy or violation of an economic boycott.
Law Applicable: Lex fori & Petitioner need not travel to U.S. UIFSA 2001 § 316(a) & rules of evidence & inter-tribunal communications apply
15
Enforcement of Child Support in a Foreign Country – U.S. View
Federal or State IV-D Reciprocity; Forms & Procedures
Give them what they want: Documents, Certificates, Translation, Foreign Currency Equivalence etc
Long ArmLocal Counsel;
DOS Websites & Judicial Assistance Circulars – not so helpful for Child Support if Non-reciprocating Country
16
Enforcement of Foreign Orders in CanadaA foreign support order (child or spousal) must be registered
before it can be enforcedRegistration process comes under ISO Act and is similar to
UIFSA process Registration must be done by designated authority (no private
process) but applicant can send order directly to designated authority
The order is registered by filing it with the Court Notice of the registration is given to the respondent Respondent can object to registration on basis he/she did not
have notice, the order is contrary to public policy, or the Court that made it did not have jurisdiction (long arm could arise here)
If registration is set aside – order is treated as if it were a request to establish a new order
17
Enforcement RemediesEnforcement of child support is rarely done
privately in CanadaPrivate enforcement can be costly and in many
provinces/territories there are enforcement remedies that are only available to child support program
Provincial/territorial enforcement programs use same type of enforcement measures as in USGarnishment, liens, interception of funds and incomePassport denials, drivers licence suspension Contempt-type court applications
18
Recognition & Enforcement of Foreign Orders in U.S.
Legal Basis - Federal Law & Policy42 USC 659a Secretary of State and HHS
designate a country to be a Foreign Reciprocating Country (FRC)
42 USC 659a(d) U.S. States can make reciprocity arrangements with foreign countries until superseded by FRC
Federal Policy: “Request” from FRC shall be treated the same as a request from a U.S. state
19
State –Foreign Country Arrangements - Constitutional? Yes!
Article II, Sec. 2, Clause 2 Grants the President the power to make Treaties
with the concurrence of 2/3 of the Senate
Article I, Sec 10 Clause 1 provides no state can enter into a treaty
Article I, Sec. 10, Clause 3 provides no state can enter into “an agreement or
compact ...with a foreign power” without the Consent of Congress = 42 USC 659a(d)
20
Other State Law Providing Legal Basis
UIFSA 2001 § 102 (21) (B) … (in addition to reciprocating countries) a country which has
“Enacted a law or established procedures for issuing and enforcing support orders that are substantially similar to UIFSA procedures”
UIFSA 2001 § 104 (Remedies Cumulative/Not Exclusive) Recognition of foreign orders on the basis of other law OK, including comity (can’t register but can use UIFSA evidentiary & inter-tribunal communications provisions
21
State? Comity?
Grave v Schubert, 2000 WL1221343 (Minn.App.) UK order modifying MN order not recognized by MN because UK modified MN CEJ order. If UK does not recognize concept of CEJ, then it is not a “state””
Foreman v. Foreman, 144 N.C.App. 582, 550 S.E.2d 792 (N.C.App., Jul 03, 2001) NC has jurisdiction to enforce England order since England is a “state” per a unilateral reciprocity extension agreement
Haker, 143 N.C.App. 688, 547 S.E.2d 127 Swiss Order not enforced because no reciprocity, no substantial similarity and not recognized under comity because no requirement of personal jurisdiction over respondent
Desselberg v. Peele, 523 S.E.2d Neither full faith and credit nor Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders Act apply to foreign orders, but NC will honor German order on the basis of comity
22
Recognition & Enforcement of Foreign Orders in U.S. – Cont’d
Indigent Clients have IV-D Agency Option OCSE PIQ 99-01 – Direct Applications
Law ApplicableG/R Lex Fori
UIFSA 2001 § 303(1) Use local procedural and substantive law
Choice of Law UIFSA 2001 § 604 (a)(1) law of issuing state governs
nature, extent, duration and amount of current supportStatute of Limitation
UIFSA 2001 § 604(b) in an action for arrears, whichever statute (issuing or responding state) is longer
23
Duration of Child Support In most provinces/territories child support will continue past
the age of majority (18 or 19 years of age)Will continue for so long as the child is “unable to withdraw
from parent’s charge” or “unable to obtain the necessaries of life because of illness, disability or other cause...”
“Other cause” includes continuing in post-secondary education, inability to find gainful employment and generally a continuing dependency upon the custodial parent
Custodial parent will have to establish that the child continues to be dependent
Some provinces/territories may require a Court order to stop child support (unless the parents agree)
24
Recognition & Enforcement of Foreign Orders in U.S. – Cont’d
Currency Conversion Judgment Date – G/R
Breach Date – ameliorates fluctuating rates Aker Verdal, 828 P.2d 610
Payment Date
See, Barry J. Brooks “International Family Support: Currency Conversion” paper in materials
25
Currency Conversion Under ISO – orders expressed in US dollars will be converted for
enforcement to Canadian dollars using exchange rate in effect on date the order was made or last varied
ISO Acts have no provision to modify or update this conversion rate Can result in discrepancies between what is owing in US dollars
(under a US order) and the converted amount in Canadian dollars Recommended solution is to obtain an order in a US Court
confirming the outstanding arrears - this can then be registered and will convert the arrears to the current equivalent amount
The currency conversion done under ISO does not modify the underlying foreign order – it simply states an Canadian dollar equivalent for enforcement purposes
26
Recognition & Enforcement of Foreign Orders in U.S. – Cont’d
ModificationUIFSA 2001 § 611 if issuing foreign court can not
or will not modify its own order, U.S. state can modify & bind all subject to its jurisdiction
Cannot modify duration of foreign order UIFSA 2001 § 604
Cannot modify spousal support order of another state UIFSA 2001 § 211
27
Modification of orders - Canada Yes - Canadian courts may reduce or eliminate arrears of child
support under foreign (and domestic) child support orders! Legal basis is generally that there has been a significant change in
circumstances and that it would be grossly unfair not to vary the arrears
A request by a party in Canada will be made under ISO, and that request will be transmitted to the jurisdiction where the other party lives
Hearing will take place in the other jurisdiction UIFSA provisions are available to initiate a modification of a
Canadian order being enforced in the United States BUT Orders made under the Canadian Divorce Act cannot be varied outside
Canada A modification request must be made directly to the Court in Canada If initiated by the Canadian party – other parent will be served ex-juris
28
Recognition & Enforcement of Foreign Orders in U.S. – Cont’d
Defenses Not an Order
Commonwealth Provisional Order German Youth Welfare Office Executable deed May be better for NCP than local order
Due Process & Public Policy See, Schuber, supra Israeli Case Reciprocity does not supersede
29
ResourcesOCSE Caseworkers Guides (available on OCSE
website) Canadian Federal Department of Justice website Canadian Provincial Enforcement Program
websitesGary’s paper “Judicial Assistance Conventions in
Effect for Mexico and the USA” (in materials) Handout – Completing USM Forms to send to
MexicoList of Helpful Websites (in materials)
30
Speaker Contact Information
Hannah RootsBritish Columbia Maintenance Enforcement Program
2nd Floor 609 Broughton StreetVictoria , British Columbia
Canada(250) 220 – 4031
Gary Caswell, Esq.318 Sumner Drive
San Antonio, Texas 78209 USATelephone: 210-414-1645
31
UIFSA 2008
Speaker
Margaret Campbell HaynesSenior Associate
Center for the Support of Families
32
Goals of UIFSA 2008 Implement the Hague Convention
Address international cases in general
Build upon UIFSA 2001
33
International Case ProcessingHague Convention is not exclusive remedy for
international orders.UIFSA already contained provisions re: bilateral
agreements and state reciprocity arrangements.
A tribunal may also recognize a foreign order on basis of comity.
Some concepts – CEJ and DCO – do not fit neatly in international arena.
34
New Definition of Foreign Country• UIFSA 2001 incl. “qualified” foreign
countries within definition of State
• UIFSA 2008 has separate definition that incl. many, but not all, foreign nations:
35
A country, including a political subdivision thereof, other than the United States, that authorizes the issuance of support orders and:(A) has been declared under US law to be a foreign reciprocating country;
(B) Has established a state reciprocal arrangement for child support;
(C) Has law or procedures for the issuance and enforcement of support orders which are substantially similar to UIFSA procedures; or
(D) In which the Convention is in force with respect to the United States.
36
Road Map• Articles 1 – 6, and as applicable Article 7,
apply to a support proceeding involving:– A foreign support order;– A foreign tribunal; or– An obligee, obligor, or child residing
in a foreign country.• Articles 1 – 6 may be applied by a tribunal
recognizing and enforcing a support order on basis of comity
• Article 7 applies only to Convention proceedings.
37
Article 7Definitions
Central AuthorityForeign support agreements (maintenance
arrangements)Procedure for registration, recognition and
enforcementLimited modification
38
Enforcement under UIFSA 2008
Direct income withholding only for support orders issued by a state. No longer requires US employers to honor DIWs from foreign countries.
39
Registration for Enforcement
Procedure for non-Hague Foreign Support OrdersUIFSA 2001
Procedure for Hague Foreign Support OrdersNew Article 7
Major difference DocumentsTime framesDefenses
40
Documents RequiredNon-Hague Foreign Support Orders
Transmittal Letter Two copies of order, incl. one certified copySworn or certified statement re: arrearsCertain obligor informationCertain obligee informationIf applicable, name and address of person to
whom support payments are to be sentRequest for DCO, if appropriate
41
Documents Required (cont’d)Hague Foreign Support Orders
Transmittal Letter Complete text of order [or abstract by issuing foreign
tribunal]Record that order is enforceable in issuing country If default order, a record attesting to due process re:
notice & opportunity to be heardRecord re: arrearsRecord re: automatic adjustment of support If necessary, a record re: receipt of free legal assistance
in issuing country
42
Time Frame to Contest Non-Hague Foreign Support Orders
Within [20] days after notice of registration Hague Foreign Support Orders
Not later than 30 days after notice of registration
Not later than 60 days after notice if contesting party does not reside in US
43
“New” DefensesHague Foreign Support Orders
Recognition and enforcement of order is manifestly incompatible with public policy, including failure of issuing tribunal to observe minimum standards of due process;
Issuing tribunal lacked personal jurisdiction consistent with Section 201;
Order is not enforceable in issuing country;
If default order, there was a lack of due process re: notice & opportunity to be heard
44
Registration for Enforcement (cont’d)Hague Foreign Support Orders
If a tribunal of a state does not recognize a Convention support order because There was a lack of personal jurisdiction There was procedural fraud A proceeding between same parties with same purpose is
pending before a tribunal of that state and that proceeding was filed first
The order is a default order but the notice and opportunity to challenge did not satisfy due process
Then the tribunal may not dismiss the proceeding without allowing a reasonable time for a party to request the establishment of a new Convention support order.
45
Registration for Enforcement (cont’d)
In fact, in a recognition and enforcement case that the IV-D child support agency is handling, the agency must take all appropriate measures to request a child-support order for the obligee.
46
What needs to happen? The Senate gave advice and consent to ratify the
Convention on September 29, 2010.
Congress must approve the implementing legislation.
States must adopt UIFSA 2008.
The President must deposit documentation with the Hague Conference on Private International Law ratifying the Convention.
47
Status of Bilateral Agreements
The U.S. currently has bilateral reciprocity agreements with 15 countries and 11 Canadian Provinces.
Convention does not affect any bilateral agreements.
48
Foreign Reciprocating Countries
• Australia• Canadian Provinces/Territories
– Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Northwest Territories, Nunavut, Newfoundland/Labrador, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Saskatchewan, Yukon
• Czech Republic• El Salvador• Finland
49
Foreign Reciprocating Countries (cont’d)
HungaryIrelandIsraelNetherlandsNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak RepublicSwitzerlandThe United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland50
51
2007 Hague Child Support ConventionInternational Families – Money, Children and Long
Term Planning
Washington D.C., 25 May 2012
Philippe Lortie, First SecretaryHague Conference on Private International Law
ABA Section of International Law
52
STATES INVOLVED IN THE NEGOTIATIONS FROM 2003 UNTIL STATES INVOLVED IN THE NEGOTIATIONS FROM 2003 UNTIL 20072007
KEY FEATURESCHILD SUPPORT CONVENTIONUniversalityAccessibilitySimplicity & FlexibilitySpeed & EfficiencyCost-effectivenessResponsive and fairNon-discriminationCo-operation and compliance
53
PRINCIPAL COMPONENTSOF NEW CONVENTIONSystem of administrative co-operation (efficient, responsive,
flexible, accessible)Procedures available in States for establishment, recognition
and enforcement, modification of decisions and recovery of arrears
Effective access to proceduresRecognition and enforcement of foreign decisions / orders
(maximum recognition, simple procedures)Swift and effective enforcementCompliance – Monitoring and reviewDirect requests to competent authoritiesApplicable law rules – set out in an optional Protocol
54
SCOPE OF APPLICATION OF CONVENTION Entire Convention applies on a mandatory basis to maintenance
cases of persons under the age of 21(possible to reserve for persons under the age of 18)
Convention covers recognition and enforcement of spousal support when combined with child support - its provision on administrative co-operation will only apply to spousal support where States have made a declaration to extend application of Convention
Application of any part of the Convention could be extended by way of declaration (with reciprocal effect) to other maintenance obligations arising from a family relationship, parentage, marriage or affinity
Convention could be extended to vulnerable adults Convention applies to children regardless of the marital status of
the parents
55
TWO TRACKS1) Applications through Central Authorities (CAs)
Children under the age of 21 (or 18 reservation)Spousal support combined with child support if State has
made a declaration to extend scope Other maintenance obligations if State has made a
declaration to extend scope
2) Direct request to a competent authority Direct requests possible for any procedure available
under internal law including, subject to Article 18, for establishment and modification
Convention procedures for recognition and enforcement available subject to some limitations
56
ADMINISTRATIVE CO-OPERATIONAPPLICATIONS THROUGH CAsAdministrative co-operation implemented
using Central Authorities (CAs)CAs focal point in relation to specific
functions:Transmitting and receiving applicationsInitiating or facilitating proceedings
Time lines and responsivenessMeans of communication
57
ADMINISTRATIVE CO-OPERATION (cont.)Convention will provide for specific applications
using recommended forms:Recognition and enforcement of Contracting States
decisionsEnforcement of requested State decisionEstablishment of decision in requested State when no
existing decision or when enforcement of existing decision impossible
Modification of decisions either by creditor or debtorRecovery of arrears
58
OTHER CENTRAL AUTHORITY FUNCTIONSHelp locate debtor / creditorHelp obtain information about financial circumstancesEncourage amicable solutionsFacilitate enforcementFacilitate transfer of paymentsFacilitate obtaining of documentary and other evidence and
service of documentsAssistance in establishing parentageHelp in obtaining provisional measuresRequests for specific measures (limited service requests)
59
EFFECTIVE ACCESS TO PROCEDURESAll Contracting States obliged to provide effective access to procedures, including enforcement and appealprocedures, by providing: Simple procedures with the assistance of CAs allowing the
applicant to proceed without further assistance Free legal assistance for applications for establishment and
for recognition and enforcement of child support decisions (with some exceptions)
A State may, as an alternative, declare that it will apply a “child-centred” means test, in cases involving establishment of child support
For all other applications processed through CAs under the Convention legal assistance may be subject to a means or merits test
60
DIRECT REQUESTS (Art. 37)Direct requests possible for any procedure available under
internal law including, subject to Article 18, for establishment and modification
Certain provisions of the Convention apply to direct requests for recognition and enforcement- Article 14(5) – no security, bond or deposit required- Article 17(2) – national treatment re legal aid- Chapter V (Recognition and enforcement)- Chapter VI (Enforcement)- Chapter VII (Public Bodies)- Chapter VIII (General Provisions) with the exception of Articles 40(2) (non-disclosure determination by CA), 42 (power of attorney), 43(3) (recovery of costs from State), 44(3) (CA language requirement), 45 (translations costs) and 55 (amendment of forms).
61
RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENTConvention applies to judicial and administrative decisions,
settlements, “maintenance agreements” (authentic instruments)Main bases for recognition and enforcement (indirect
jurisdiction) Respondent habitually resident in the State of origin Respondent submitted to the jurisdiction Creditor habitually resident in the State of origin (reservation
possible) Child resident in the State of origin when proceedings instituted and
respondent lived with the child there or resided there and provided support for the child there
Agreement to the jurisdiction by the parties except in the case of child support (reservation possible)
Authority exercising jurisdiction on a matter of personal status or parental responsibility (reservation possible)
62
RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT(cont.)Grounds for refusing recognition and
enforcement Decision manifestly incompatible with public
policy Decision obtained by fraud relating to procedure Competition between pending case and foreign
decision Conflicting decisions (res judicata) No proper notice or opportunity to be heard Debtor exceeded limits on proceedings
(Article 18)
63
PROCEDURES FOR RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENTRegistration for enforcement
grounds for refusal are limited no submissions from the parties
Challenge or appeal within limited time and on limited grounds
Further appeal if permitted by law of State addressed, without staying the enforcement of the decision
Alternative procedureLinkage with national enforcement procedures
64
ENFORCEMENT MEASURESWeakness under existing child support systems has been a
lack of effective enforcement mechanismsWhile choice of specific enforcement measures are left to
the requested State, States are required to make available effective enforcement measures
Convention provides a list of possible measures that a State might, at its option, use, including Wage withholding Garnishment Deductions from social security payments Lien on or forced sale of property Tax refund withholding License denial or suspension
65
NEW ROLE FOR ATTORNEYSAdvise clients on best track (CA or Direct Request)
Legal tradition differences and language barriers CA services v. domestic attorney Cost issues (access to procedures / legal aid) Speed of procedures
Advise clients on available applications Domestic or foreign establishment? Any reservation on recognition and enforcement? What is the most favourable law?
Domestic establishment + foreign service + recognition and enforcement abroad
Foreign establishment + domestic service + direct enforcement abroad?
66
FUTURE COMING INTO FORCE
USA signed the Convention on 23-XI-2007 Burkina Faso signed the Convention on 7-I-2009 Ukraine signed the Convention on 7-VII-2010 EU approved the Protocol on 8-IV-2010 and signed
the Convention on 6-IV-2011 Norway ratified the Convention on 6-IV-2011 Albania signed the Convention on 21-X-2011 Bosnia and Herzegovina signed the Convention on
5-VII-2011 Other States to join soon: Brazil
67
68
QuestionsQuestions
Permanent Bureau Hague Conference on Private International Law
6, Scheveningseweg2517 KT The Hague
The Netherlands
Tel.: + 31 (70) 363 3303Fax: + 31 (70) 360 4867
E-mail: [email protected]: www.hcch.net
Thank You-Gary
-Hannah-Meg
-Philippe-Rhiannon
69
