Prejudice of foreign judicial acts in private international law: conflict of doctrines

the article explores the theoretical and practical problems of recognizing the prejudicial power of foreign judicial acts in private international law (PJM). A fundamental conflict is analyzed between the doctrine of territorial sovereignty (requiring mandatory exequatur to give a decision a prejudicial effect) and the doctrine of international politeness (allowing automatic recognition of prejudice based on mutual respect of legal systems). The compromise doctrine of reciprocity, enshrined in the legislation of the Russian Federation and the Federal Republic of Germany, is critically assessed, which in practice faces difficulties in proving and the risk of arbitrary court decisions. Particular attention is paid to the phenomenon of "double prejudice" - a situation in which conflicting judicial acts of different states claim truth, which undermines the principle of legal certainty and leads to economic losses. As a solution, a differentiated model based on the functional heterogeneity of prejudicial facts is proposed.

prejudice, foreign judicial acts, exequatur doctrine, reciprocity, public order, Hague Conventions