British royal family could face its biggest crisis, as civil suit against Prince Andrew looms

That only applies for criminal cases. Andrew got a civil case.
https://time.com/6107815/prince-andrew-sexual-abuse-lawsuit-allegations/


The US doesn't got a treaty covering it. Maybe they ones had it with the EU, but the UK left the EU. Not sure about that.

 

Judgements can be enforced it is just has more process and requirements than a civil suit brought in a British court there is no direct reciprocal agreement.

 

Them judgements can only be enforced in the US, but not in the UK.
I sourced it in post 76.

 

Can US Judgments be Enforced in the UK?
By Christopher Charlesworth

Ford & Warren

Leeds, England

1 The special relationship between the UK and U.S. has been a source of comfort to those who conduct business across the Atlantic but caution is needed when it comes to enforcing American judgments in the UK.

2 Like the U.S. the UK is not a single jurisdiction. There are three distinct jurisdictions: (1) England and Wales, (2) Scotland and (3) Northern Ireland. This article covers the rules relating to England and Wales.

3 England and Wales has different procedures for enforcing foreign judgments depending on their country of origin. The first method applies to countries who are signatories to the Brussels Regulations 2001 or the Lugano Convention 1998. The second applies to countries that have a bilateral agreement with the UK for reciprocal enforcement rights. Neither of these apply to the U.S. As a result U.S. creditors are required to rely on the English Common Law. English Common Law recognises a U.S. judgment as an implied contract to pay.

4 The first step is for the judgment creditor to commence proceedings by issuing proceedings by issuing a Claim Form, usually in the High Court (in England there are two courts, the High Court and the County Court, the High Court is generally used for higher value claims.

5 Once the proceedings are served the Defendant has 14 days to acknowledge the claim and state whether he intends to defend. If he fails to do so then the creditor is entitled to a judgment by default because the debtor is deemed to have admitted the claim. If the debtor indicates he is going to defend then the creditor can apply for summary judgment. This is a relatively fast procedure for determining claims. To succeed the creditor must persuade the court that the Defendant does not have reasonable grounds for defending the claim. If there is genuine doubt then this will be exercised in favour of the debtor.

Jurisdiction Defences

6 In deciding whether to enforce a U.S. judgment the English Court will consider whether the U.S. court had jurisdiction. This will involve considering whether the debtor submitted or consented to U.S. jurisdiction, this can be demonstrated by the voluntary appearance of the debtor in the U.S. court. If the debtor did not appear then the English court will infer acceptance in one of three ways. Firstly if the debtor was resident at the commencement of the proceedings (a company will be deemed to be present within the jurisdiction if it was trading in the U.S. at the material time), secondly it can be inferred that if there was an exclusive jurisdiction clause in writing between the parties. Finally contractual clauses relating to the acceptance of service of process will usually be interpreted as the judgment debtor consenting to the foreign jurisdiction.

7 Once jurisdiction is established the English courts must be satisfied that the judgment debtor was aware of the original proceedings. The judgment creditor will be required to produce evidence of this.

Finality

8 To be enforceable the U.S. judgment must be conclusive on the merits i.e. the U.S. court must have given and final and reasoned decision. Judgments that are subject to an ongoing appeal are not capable of registration until the relevant appeal judgment has been delivered. The English courts will not accept interim awards or judgments that are not for defined sums. A witness statement from a qualified attorney is generally required to demonstrate that the judgment is a final award.

Punitive damages

9 The English approach to damages is different to that of the U.S. courts. Awards for general damages follow judicial guidelines and as a consequence awards are substantially lower than their U.S. equivalents. Crucially in England, awards for punitive damages are rare and courts will not enforce awards for damages that are punitive or penal in nature.

Other defences

10 In addition to the above the debtor can also raise a number of generic defences. It will be a defence if the debtor can demonstrate that the judgment was obtained by fraud. A debtor may also argue that it would be contrary to public policy to register and enforce the judgment in the UK. Finally, a judgment debtor may plead that the original proceedings were contrary to the rules of natural justice.

Summary

U.S attorneys should be aware of the limitations on enforcing judgments in the English courts. A client who has invested considerable costs in obtaining a judgment assuming that it can be enforced will naturally be disappointed if he finds that it is not the case.

For more information about Ford & Warren, visit http://www.primerus.com/law-firms/ford-warren-leeds-west-yorkshire-wyk.htmor http://www.forwarn.com.


Also

https://www.penningtonslaw.com/news...n-enforcing-us-judgments-in-england-and-wales

 

That page is about debt and commerce. It has nothing to do with a civil lawsuit. And while debt and commerce is already mentioned that it's not that straightforward at all, it's not like a criminal case or a civil case.

 

Even if you insist you can use your source and all of that... it does end with:
it is surprising that there is still no reciprocal agreement in place between the US and UK to enforce court judgments.

It also reads:
In considering jurisdiction, it is also important to assess whether a statutory defence may be available under section 32(1) of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982. In summary, this states that a foreign judgment will not be recognised or enforced in the UK where it was obtained contrary to any agreement under which the dispute in question was to be settled. This may apply where an agreement contains an arbitration or jurisdiction clause, for example.....'

There are plenty of sources to be found saying that you can't make a UK citizen pay like that. Have an other one if you will:
https://wlegal.co.uk/prince-andrew-legal-issues/

A court of a foreign country outside the United Kingdom has jurisdiction to give a judgment capable of enforcement or recognition as against the person against whom it was given if: –

1. The person against whom the judgment was given was, at the time the proceedings were instituted, present in the foreign country.
2. The person against whom the judgment was given was claimant, or counterclaimed, in the proceedings in the foreign court.
3. The person against whom the judgment was given, submitted to the jurisdiction of that court by voluntarily appearing in the proceedings.
4. The person against whom the judgment was given, had before the commencement of the proceedings agreed, in respect of the subject matter of the proceedings, to submit to the jurisdiction of that court or of the courts of that country.”

So all Prince Andrew has to do, is simply not show up, and not file a counter claim, and not comment if he want's to submit to the court.
It's not that hard to avoid paying some massive million bucks worth of debt if she ever gets to win the case.

 

Interesting and thanks for the information.
I did wonder if the legal jurisdiction of where the offenses were committed apply.
Apparently these included multiple places.
But as of yet I am not clear exactly what the charges are. They seem quite general to me.

 

As I said yes a US citizen can seek a judgement against someone in the UK.

 

They can seek it, and get it... but can't make them pay in a civil case when they comply to rules 1 to 4 mentioned in my previous post.

 

'Age of consent refers to the time you can consent to sex with parental consent, not by yourself' WHAT? That's news to me(and news to many.) So is there a separate age(likely 21 if I were to stab a guess) wherein parental consent is no longer necessary?

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/12/jud...DCgchuohgLMj4IFBcgD7NcPN6I#Echobox=1641998596

Whomp WHOMP WHOMP

Guess you should stick to lawyering in the bush only eh?

 

Many things which are basic law are mystifying to lay persons. It happens alot, don't worry about it.

The age at which you become an adult, no longer subject to parental control legally speaking IE 18.
Why would you think 21? That makes no sense.

 

Well, looks like we are all going to find out. Andy gonna have to withstand the judicial scrutiny one way or the other. He should have kept his undies on like Dersh.

 

You realize that Andrew voluntarily appeared before the Court already right?

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/12/jud...DCgchuohgLMj4IFBcgD7NcPN6I#Echobox=1641998596
^ he's seeking to have her suit dismissed based on the idea that he's protected by an agreement she made with epstein in which he was not a named party.
By making this pleading before the Court, he has voluntarily made an appearance.


There.

Now, stop talking about the law if you don't know how it works.

 

As I said yes a US citizen can seek a judgement against someone in the UK as opposed to your claim otherwise.

 

You say that, while you just sourced that Andrew lost a bid to dismiss the case.
So they haven't even started it. Dunno how you think he was already there before the case started.

courtcase did not even start.

 

Holy ****. Do you not understand that if you make a motion to dismiss, that means theres a ****ing cause no. and the case is active?
The case starts prior to trial. How on earth do you not understand this?

Yes, it has. You can tell by how he wanted it DISMISSED. You can't DISMISS a case that hasn't started o esteemed member of the brain trust.

 

Can you link me to the actual decision, and not a media report of it. Here it is also reported that the Judge has allowed the case to proceed but I am not sure what he meant when he found that it was 'too soon' to decide if the Indemnity Agreement is enforceable.

Weird.

 

We talked about if it's enforceable. And when played right, a civil case is not enforceable on a person living in the UK. You've jumped ship on it by now claiming that they still can do the case.

 

I think it's the other way around. You can't start a case, when the court has no jurisdiction etc.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-59871514

This reads:
Prince Andrew is to face a civil case in the US over allegations he sexually assaulted a woman when she was 17.
To face,... so it's not facing one yet,... since it hasn't started.

It means the case against the Duke of York, 61, could be heard in court later this year.
Could be heard,... so the case hasn't been heard yet.... since it hasn't started.

 

A case being heard means it goes to trial o wise and learned one.
A case exists before it is heard, this is known as the PRE TRIAL process.
When you make a substantive motion in a case without filing a special appearance, as Andrew did here, you bind yourself to the Court's jurisdiction. This is quite literally day 1 of civil procedure.
Please for the love of God in Heaven above who looks down on us all with mercy in his heart despite our profligate actions, go educate yourself before you speak on a subject.

 

Counsel that you claim to be, I'm sure you're able to find it on your own.

He didn't dismiss the case based on it, citing that Andrew is not a party only Epstein and Giuffre were. So only they can say what it meant. Epstein is dead, so he can't be called on to testify, he's not a party opponent so his words can't come in, he'll be unavailable as he's dead but none of the exceptions really allow a nuanced legal explanation of the intent of a document and who all would be covered by it.
So its up to Giuffre, and she says Andy wasn't covered. There are some formalities to grind through yet, but he's basically admitted to liability if his little gambit doesn't work, and he didn't file a special appearance so he's under the jurisdiction of the court and a judgement can be enforced against him overseas as well as here.
Which means he, or rather his mommy, is going to offer Giuffre a truly embarrassing sum of riches to go away and sign a binding agreement not to talk about it, some time before trial.
Watch.

 

It is enforceable, if a judgement is rendered here there is a process to get it enforced in the UK so the woman suing can get her judgement if she receives one and it looks like that lawsuit continues.

 

Breaking news.
Prince Andrew loses military titles and patronages, and will no longer be called HRH.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59987935

 

Does this mean he's going to fight the accusations in court rather than try to settle out of court?