SB642: Bill Text

LRB-5091/1

ARG:wlj

2019 - 2020 LEGISLATURE

2019 Senate BILL 642

January 8, 2020 - Introduced by Senators Risser and Wanggaard, cosponsored by Representatives Tusler, Hebl, Anderson, Knodl, Stubbs and Brooks. Referred to Committee on Insurance, Financial Services, Government Oversight and Courts.

SB642,1,5 An Act to create subchapter I (title) of chapter 806 [precedes 806.01], subchapter II (title) of chapter 806 [precedes 806.30], subchapter III (title) of chapter 806 [precedes 806.50], 806.50, 806.51, 806.52, 806.53, 806.54, 806.55, 806.56, 806.57, 806.58 and 806.59 of the statutes; relating to: adopting the Uniform Foreign-Country Money Judgments Recognition Act.

Analysis by the Legislative Reference Bureau

This bill incorporates into Wisconsin law the 2005 Uniform Foreign-Country Money Judgments Recognition Act adopted by the Uniform Law Commission. The bill requires the courts of this state to recognize a judgment of a court outside the United States that grants or denies the recovery of a sum of money. Under the bill, to receive recognition by this state's courts, the foreign country's judgment must be final, conclusive, and enforceable. The bill excludes foreign-country money judgments that are for taxes, for forfeitures or fines, or for support, maintenance, or a property division in connection with a domestic relations case.

Under the bill, this state's circuit courts are prohibited from recognizing a foreign-country money judgment that was rendered by a judicial system that does not provide procedures compatible with the due process of law or that did not have jurisdiction over the subject matter. In addition, a circuit court may not recognize a foreign-country money judgment if the foreign court did not have personal jurisdiction over the defendant, but for purposes of the bill, personal jurisdiction exists if any one of a number of criteria are met, including that the defendant was personally served with process in the foreign country, the defendant voluntarily appeared in the foreign court, the defendant had agreed to submit to the jurisdiction of the foreign court, the defendant was domiciled in the country where the foreign judgment was rendered, or the defendant was a business that was organized under the laws of, or had its principal place of business in, that foreign country.

The bill allows the circuit courts to refuse to recognize a foreign-country money judgment for a number of reasons, including if the defendant did not receive sufficient timely notice of the proceedings, if the judgment was obtained by fraud, if the claim for relief that resulted in the judgment is repugnant to the public policy of this state, if the judgment conflicts with another final and conclusive judgment, or if the circumstances of the rendering of the judgment raise substantial doubt about the integrity of the foreign court that rendered the judgment.

The bill requires the circuit court, if it determines that the foreign-country money judgment deserves recognition, to give the judgment full faith and credit in this state, and to enforce that judgment in the same manner as a judgment rendered by a court in this state.

The people of the state of Wisconsin, represented in senate and assembly, do enact as follows:

SB642,1 Section 1. Subchapter I (title) of chapter 806 [precedes 806.01] of the statutes is created to read:

SB642,2,3 Chapter 806

SB642,2,5 subchapter I Judgment; general

SB642,2 Section 2. Subchapter II (title) of chapter 806 [precedes 806.30] of the statutes is created to read:

SB642,2,8 Chapter 806

SB642,2,11 Subchapter ii judgment; Uniform foreign money claims

SB642,3 Section 3. Subchapter III (title) of chapter 806 [precedes 806.50] of the statutes is created to read:

SB642,3,1 Chapter 806

SB642,3,4 Subchapter III judgment; Uniform foreign-country money judgments recognition

SB642,4 Section 4. 806.50 of the statutes is created to read:

SB642,3,6 806.50 Definitions. (1) In this subchapter:

SB642,3,7 (a) “Foreign country" means a government other than one of the following:

SB642,3,8 1. The U.S. government.

SB642,3,10 2. The government of a state, district, commonwealth, territory, or insular possession of the United States.

SB642,3,13 3. Any other government with regard to which the decision in this state as to whether to recognize the judgment of that government's courts is initially subject to a determination under article IV, section 1, of the U.S. Constitution.

SB642,3,14 4. A federally recognized Indian tribe or band in this state.

SB642,3,16 (b) “Foreign-country judgment" means a judgment of a court of a foreign country.

SB642,5 Section 5. 806.51 of the statutes is created to read:

SB642,3,20 806.51 Applicability. (1) Except as provided in sub. (2), this subchapter applies to a foreign-country judgment to the extent that the foreign-country judgment meets all of the following criteria:

SB642,3,21 (a) Grants or denies recovery of a sum of money.

SB642,3,23 (b) Under the law of the foreign country where the foreign-country judgment is rendered, is final, conclusive, and enforceable.

SB642,4,3 (2) This subchapter does not apply to a foreign-country judgment, even if the foreign-country judgment grants or denies recovery of a sum of money, to the extent that the foreign-country judgment is any of the following:

SB642,4,4 (a) A judgment for taxes.

SB642,4,5 (b) A judgment of a forfeiture, fine, or other penalty.

SB642,4,7 (c) A judgment for support, maintenance, property division, or other judgment rendered in connection with domestic relations.

SB642,6 Section 6. 806.52 of the statutes is created to read:

SB642,4,11 806.52 Standards for recognition of a foreign-country judgment. (1) Except as provided in subs. (2) and (3), a circuit court shall recognize a foreign-country judgment to which this subchapter applies under s. 806.51.

SB642,4,13 (2) A circuit court may not recognize a foreign-country judgment if any of the following applies:

SB642,4,16 (a) The foreign-country judgment was rendered under a judicial system that does not provide impartial tribunals or procedures compatible with the requirements of due process of law.

SB642,4,18 (b) Subject to s. 806.53 (1), the foreign court that rendered the foreign-country judgment did not have personal jurisdiction over the defendant in the proceeding.

SB642,4,20 (c) The foreign court that rendered the foreign-country judgment did not have jurisdiction over the subject matter.

SB642,4,22 (3) A circuit court need not recognize a foreign-country judgment if any of the following applies:

SB642,4,25 (a) The defendant in the proceeding in the foreign court that rendered the foreign-country judgment did not receive notice of the proceeding in sufficient time to enable the defendant to defend.

SB642,5,2 (b) The foreign-country judgment was obtained by fraud that deprived the losing party of an adequate opportunity to present its case.

SB642,5,5 (c) The foreign-country judgment or the claim for relief on which the foreign-country judgment is based is repugnant to the public policy of this state or of the United States.

SB642,5,7 (d) The foreign-country judgment conflicts with another final and conclusive judgment.

SB642,5,10 (e) The proceeding in the foreign court that rendered the foreign-country judgment was contrary to an agreement between the parties under which the dispute in question was to be determined otherwise than by proceedings in that foreign court.

SB642,5,13 (f) In the case of jurisdiction based only on personal service, the foreign court that rendered the foreign-country judgment was a seriously inconvenient forum for the trial of the action.

SB642,5,16 (g) The foreign-country judgment was rendered in circumstances that raise substantial doubt about the integrity of the foreign court that rendered the foreign-country judgment with respect to the foreign-country judgment.

SB642,5,18 (h) The specific proceeding in the foreign court leading to the foreign-country judgment was not compatible with the requirements of due process of law.

SB642,5,21 (4) The party resisting recognition of the foreign-country judgment has the burden of establishing that one of the grounds for nonrecognition of that foreign-country judgment under sub. (2) or (3) exists.