Common use of Enforceability of New York Judgment Clause in Contracts

Enforceability of New York Judgment. Any final judgment for a fixed or readily calculable sum of money rendered by any state court in the State of New York or United States federal court located in the State of New York having jurisdiction under its own domestic laws in respect of any suit, action or proceeding against the Company based upon this Agreement, the Indenture or the Securities would be declared enforceable against the Company by the courts of Mexico without reexamination, review of the merits of the cause of action in respect of which the original judgment was given or relitigation of the matters adjudicated upon or payment of any stamp, registration or similar tax on duty, provided that (a) such judgment is obtained in compliance with legal requirements of the jurisdiction of the court rendering such judgment and in compliance with the terms set forth in the relevant agreement; (b) such judgment is strictly for the payment of a certain sum of money and has been rendered in an in personam action as opposed to an in rem action; (c) process was served personally on the Company or on the appropriate process agent (a Mexican court would consider personal service of process upon the agent for service of process appointed in Section 12 of this Agreement to be personal service of process meeting procedural requirements of Mexico); provided that service of process by mail is not deemed to be personal service under the laws of Mexico; (d) such judgment does not contravene Mexican law, Mexican public policy, international treaties or agreements binding upon Mexico or generally accepted principles of international law; (e) the applicable procedure under the laws of Mexico with respect to the enforcement of foreign judgments (including, but not limited to, the issuance of a letter rogatory by the competent authority of such jurisdiction requesting enforcement of such judgment as authentic by the corresponding authorities of such jurisdiction in accordance with the laws thereof) is complied with; (f) such judgment is final in the jurisdiction in which it was issued; (g) the action in respect of which such judgment was rendered is not the subject matter of a lawsuit among the same parties pending before a Mexican court; (h) any such foreign court would enforce final judgments rendered by the federal or state courts of Mexico as a matter of reciprocity; and (i) the judgment and related documents are translated into Spanish by a duly authorized expert for their admissibility before the Mexican courts before which enforcement is requested, such translation being subject to approval by the Mexican court after the defendant has been given an opportunity to be heard with respect to the accuracy of the translation, and such proceedings would thereafter be based upon the translated documents. Furthermore, the Company is not aware of any reason why enforcement of any judgment obtained against the Company in connection with this Agreement, the Indenture or the Securities would contravene public policy of Mexico.

Enforceability of New York Judgment. Any final judgment for a fixed or readily calculable sum of money rendered by any state court in the State of New York or United States federal court located in the State of New York having jurisdiction under its own domestic laws in respect of any suit, action or proceeding against the Company based upon this Agreement, the Indenture or the Securities would be declared enforceable against the Company by the courts of Mexico without reexamination, review of the merits of the cause of action in respect of which the original judgment was given or relitigation of the matters adjudicated upon or payment of any stamp, registration or similar tax on duty, provided that (a) such judgment is obtained in compliance with legal requirements of the jurisdiction of the court rendering such judgment and in compliance with the terms set forth in the relevant agreement; (b) such judgment is strictly for the payment of a certain sum of money and has been rendered in an in personam action as opposed to an in rem action; (c) process was served personally on the Company or on the appropriate process agent (a Mexican court would consider personal service of process upon the agent for service of process appointed in Section 12 of this Agreement to be personal service of process meeting procedural requirements of Mexico); provided provided, that service of process by mail is not deemed to be personal service under the laws of Mexico; (d) such judgment does not contravene Mexican law, Mexican public policy, international treaties or agreements binding upon Mexico or generally accepted principles of international law; (e) the applicable procedure under the laws of Mexico with respect to the enforcement of foreign judgments (including, but not limited to, the issuance of a letter rogatory by the competent authority of such jurisdiction requesting enforcement of such judgment as authentic by the corresponding authorities of such jurisdiction in accordance with the laws thereof) is complied with; (f) such judgment is final in the jurisdiction in which it was issued; (g) the action in respect of which such judgment was rendered is not the subject matter of a lawsuit among the same parties pending before a Mexican court; (h) any such foreign court would enforce final judgments rendered by the federal or state courts of Mexico as a matter of reciprocity; and (i) the judgment and related documents are translated into Spanish by a duly authorized expert for their admissibility before the Mexican courts before which enforcement is requested, such translation being subject to approval by the Mexican court after the defendant has been given an opportunity to be heard with respect to the accuracy of the translation, and such proceedings would thereafter be based upon the translated documents. Furthermore, the Company is not aware of any reason why enforcement of any judgment obtained against the Company in connection with this Agreement, the Indenture or the Securities would contravene public policy of Mexico.

Enforceability of New York Judgment. Any final and conclusive monetary judgment for a fixed or readily calculable sum of money rendered by any state court in the State of New York or United States federal court located in the State of New York having jurisdiction under its own domestic laws in respect of any suit, action or proceeding against the Company of any New York State or Federal court sitting in New York City based upon this Agreement, Agreement and the Indenture or the Securities would Deposit Agreement shall be declared enforceable against the Company recognized and enforced by the courts of Mexico the Republic of Chile, without reexamination, review of re-examining or re-litigating the merits of the cause of action in respect original action, provided the following conditions are met (the existence or non-existence of which would be determined by the original Supreme Court of Chile): (A) if there is a treaty between Chile and the country where the judgment was passed, the provisions of such treaty will apply, (B) in the absence of a treaty, the rules of reciprocity will apply to the enforcement of judgments; if the country where the judgment was passed does not recognize judgments of Chilean courts, such foreign judgments may not be enforced in Chile, and (C) if the previous rules cannot be applied, the monetary judgment of foreign courts will have in Chile the same effect as the judgments given or relitigation of the matters adjudicated upon or payment of any stamp, registration or similar tax on dutyby Chilean courts, provided that that: (aw) such the foreign monetary judgment does not contain anything contrary to the laws of Chile, (x) the foreign monetary judgment is obtained not contrary to public policy of Chile and does not affect in compliance with legal requirements of any way properties situated in Chile, which are subject exclusively to the jurisdiction of local courts, (y) the court rendering such judgment and defendant against whom the enforcement is sought has been given personal notice of the proceedings in compliance accordance with the terms set forth in the relevant agreement; (b) such judgment is strictly for the payment of a certain sum of money Chilean law and has been rendered afforded a real opportunity to appear before the foreign court and defend his case, which are factual issues that must be established when obtaining in an in personam action as opposed to an in rem action; (c) process was served personally on Chile the Company or on the appropriate process agent (enforcement of a Mexican court would consider personal service of process upon the agent for service of process appointed in Section 12 of this Agreement to be personal service of process meeting procedural requirements of Mexico); provided that foreign monetary judgment. Under Chilean law, service of process by mail is will not be deemed to be constitute personal service of process for the above purposes, and (z) the foreign monetary judgment is final (i.e., not subject to any recourse), conclusive and enforceable under the laws of Mexico; (d) such the state of New York. Upon compliance with the above, the courts in the Republic of Chile shall enforce a final and conclusive monetary judgment does not contravene Mexican lawrendered by any New York State or Federal court sitting in New York City, Mexican public policy, international treaties or agreements binding upon Mexico or generally accepted principles in accordance with the procedure applicable to the enforcement of international law; (e) the applicable procedure final and conclusive foreign judgments in Chile under the laws provisions of Mexico with respect the Chilean Civil Procedure Code (Código de Procedimiento Civil). To enforce a foreign judgment in Chile, a judgment must be submitted to the Supreme Court of Chile, in the form of a legalized and officially translated copy. The Supreme Court of Chile will hear arguments from the party against whom enforcement is sought, but such hearing will be limited to aspects relating to such enforcement and not to substantive issues resolved in the foreign judgment. As of the date hereof, there is no treaty between the Republic of Chile and the United States on the enforcement of foreign judgments. In practice, due to the difficulties of proving in each case whether the reciprocity rule on the enforcement of foreign judgments (including, but applies or not limited to, the issuance of a letter rogatory by the competent authority of such jurisdiction requesting enforcement of such judgment as authentic by the corresponding authorities of such jurisdiction in accordance with the laws thereof) is complied with; (f) such judgment is final in the jurisdiction in which it was issued; (g) the action in respect of which such judgment was rendered is not a specific country, the subject Supreme Court of Chile’s approach on the matter has generally been the examination of a lawsuit among the same parties pending before a Mexican court; whether circumstances in letters (hw) any and (x) above are duly met by such foreign court would enforce final judgments rendered by the federal or state courts of Mexico as a matter of reciprocity; and (i) the judgment and related documents are translated into Spanish by a duly authorized expert for their admissibility before the Mexican courts before which enforcement is requested, such translation being subject to approval by the Mexican court after the defendant has been given an opportunity to be heard with respect to the accuracy of the translation, and such proceedings would thereafter be based upon the translated documents. Furthermore, the Company is not aware of any reason why enforcement of any judgment obtained against the Company in connection with this Agreement, the Indenture or the Securities would contravene public policy of Mexicojudgment.