i-law

Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly

International Private Law

Adam Rushworth * and Andrew Scott

CASES

203. Apostolides v. Orams1

Brussels I Regulation, Arts 1, 34(2), 35(1), 38(1), 72—recognition and enforcement of judgments—public policy—northern Cyprus
The Republic of Cyprus, whilst considered de jure one country under international law, has been de facto two countries since the Turkish invasion of the northern area in 1974. Prior to 1974, Mr Apostolides owned property in northern Cyprus. He fled after the Turkish invasion. The Turkish government deemed all abandoned land in the northern area to be its own and sold it to private persons. Mr and Mrs Orams, an English domiciled couple, later bought from a private party the land which Mr Apostolides had abandoned. Subsequently, Mr Apostolides claimed ownership of the land in the District Court of Nicosia, a Cypriot court located in the Cypriot Government-controlled area. Judgment was given in favour of Mr Apostolides and brought by him to England for recognition and enforcement. A number of questions were referred to the ECJ by the English Court of Appeal. First, did suspension of the acquis communautaire in relation to northern Cyprus preclude a Member State court from recognising and enforcing, under the Brussels I Regulation, a judgment given by a Cypriot court in relation to land situate there? Second, did Art 35(1) of the Regulation in any case entitle or bind a Member State court addressed to refuse to recognise a judgment given by courts of another Member State concerning land in the latter state over which its Government lacks effective control? Third, could such a judgment be refused recognition under Art 34(1) on the grounds of public policy, namely that, as a practical matter, the judgment could not be enforced in northern Cyprus, where the land was situate? Fourth, where a default judgment has been entered against a defendant, which judgment does not fulfil the requirements of Art 34(2) of the Regulation, but the defendant has unsuccessfully challenged the default judgment in the court of origin following a full and fair hearing, can that defendant still rely on the Art 34(2) in the courts of the Member State addressed? Fifth, if so, what factors were relevant to the assessment of sufficient time under Art 34(2)?
Judgment: (1) The Brussels I Regulation applied: (i) the suspension of the application of the acquis communautaire was limited to the northern area of Cyprus, and in the present case the judgments originated from a court in the Cypriot Government-controlled area; (ii)


INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LAW

133

The rest of this document is only available to i-law.com online subscribers.

If you are already a subscriber, click Log In button.

Copyright © 2024 Maritime Insights & Intelligence Limited. Maritime Insights & Intelligence Limited is registered in England and Wales with company number 13831625 and address 5th Floor, 10 St Bride Street, London, EC4A 4AD, United Kingdom. Lloyd's List Intelligence is a trading name of Maritime Insights & Intelligence Limited.

Lloyd's is the registered trademark of the Society Incorporated by the Lloyd's Act 1871 by the name of Lloyd's.