A foreign judgment shall not be refused recognition for lack

This service is not meant for legal advice, and your case is certainly a complex one, even more considering that a judgment was issued by a UK court and your claim was unsuccessful.

That said, the principle you quoted is that a judgment issued in a foreign country shall not be refused recognition on the basis of lack of personal jurisdiction (i.e. when the courts of the other country would not have jurisdiction on the person) if the defendant was served personally in the foreign state whose court issued the judgment or the defendant voluntarily appeared in the proceedings for a reason other than protecting property seized or threatened with seizure in the proceedings or contesting the jurisdiction of the court over him.

Since you are in the USA, whether the UK court judgment may be enforced could depend on certain circumstances, but you were the one who started proceedings in the UK, so I would say that, on a general note, I can't see why the judgment could not be enforced against you.

That said, this is solicitors' business, not do-it-yourself.

If your solicitors cannot provide you with conclusive advice, I suggest that you find another solicitor, with expertise in this area of law.

I hope this information is helpful and I wish you the best.

Please do not hesitate to contact JA again if you need help and you may ask to speak with me directly if you wish.

Regards.

There are many law firms in the USA who have offices in multiple countries and practise also cross-border litigation.

Most big international law firms do that.

They can be expensive, but they certainly have the know-how.

Regards.

Hello.

I have already closed this conversation, but I will try to provide you with a quick feedback.

I may understand your frustration at the situation, but I cannot recommend any specific law firm, nor would I do it as a personal policy.

What I meant is that big law firms, having offices in many countries, normally deal also with international disputes, therefore it's more likely that lawyers from such firms have expertise in jurisdiction matters.

I am sure that, if you contact one of these top law firms, they could be able to help you, but, predictably, their services will be more expensive than those of an "average" lawyer, as good as the latter might be.

As for explaining the clause that you quoted, and after confirming that this service is not meant for legal advice, jurisdiction matters are complex legal matters, and certainly I cannot provide you with a legal opinion on Section 5 (1) and (2) of the UNIFORM FOREIGN-COUNTRY MONEY JUDGMENTS RECOGNITION ACT (2005).

However, I can confirm that the principle stated by the provision in question is that a judgment issued in a foreign country shall not be refused recognition by the courts of another country on grounds of lack of personal jurisdiction (i.e. when the courts of this other country would not have jurisdiction on the person) if that person ("the defendant") was served (i.e. notified) personally in the foreign state whose court issued the judgment or that same person voluntarily appeared in the proceedings for a reason other than protecting property seized or threatened with seizure in the proceedings or contesting the jurisdiction of the court over him.

Basically, bullet 1 refers to the circumstances of the defendant when the plaintiff/claimant managed to serve the defendant personally abroad (which means that the defendant cannot say they were unaware of the foreign judgment, and the judgment cannot therefore be refused recognition on grounds of lack of personal jurisdiction), while bullet 2 means that, if the defendant voluntarily appeared in the proceedings, but not just for the purpose of protecting property seized or threatened with seizure in the proceedings or of contesting the jurisdiction of the court over him, then again the foreign judgment cannot be refused recognition on grounds of lack of personal jurisdiction.

Regards.