The 2005 Hague choice of court and the 2019 Hague Judgments Conventions versus The New York Convention: rivals, alternatives or something else?

The 2019 Hague Judgments Convention is the culmination of almost 50 years of work in this area by the Hague Conference on Private International Law (HCCH) and together with the 2005 Choice of Court Convention (hereafter the ‘Hague Conventions’) creates a system which operates as the litigation equivalent to the New York Convention enabling harmonised recognition and enforcement of judgments throughout the globe. The aim of this essay is to compare the Hague Conventions with the New York Convention and establish whether the former are a rival, alternative or something else altogether for the latter. In order to do so, this essay will look at four main issues (i) the obligations imposed on states under the Hague Conventions and the New York Convention, (ii) the scope of the Hague Conventions and the New York Convention, (iii) grounds for refusal of recognition or enforcement under the Hague Conventions and the New York Convention, and (iv) reservations available under the Hague and New York Conventions.