BILL NUMBER: SB 320	AMENDED
	BILL TEXT

	AMENDED IN SENATE  MARCH 31, 2009

INTRODUCED BY   Senator Corbett

                        FEBRUARY 25, 2009

   An act to amend Sections 1716 and 1717 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, relating to judgments.


	LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


   SB 320, as amended, Corbett. Judgments: foreign-country money
judgments.
   Existing law,  the  Uniform Foreign-Country Money
Judgments Recognition Act  ,  provides that foreign-country
judgments that grant or deny recovery of a sum of money and that are
final and conclusive are enforceable in California, with specified
exceptions. The act excepts foreign-country judgments from its
provisions in certain instances, including when the judgment was
rendered under a system that does not provide impartial tribunals or
the court lacked jurisdiction. The act prohibits nonrecognition of a
foreign judgment based on a lack of personal jurisdiction if certain
bases of personal jurisdiction are present.
   This bill would additionally except from recognition under the act
a  defamation judgment obtained in a jurisdiction outside
the United States, unless the court in this state first determines
that the defamation law applied in the foreign court's adjudication
provided   foreign-country judgment if a court of this
state has determined that the defamation law applied by a foreign
court in adjudicating a claim of defamation does not provide  at
least as much protection for freedom of speech and the press
 in that case as would be   as  provided by
both the United States and California Constitutions. The bill would
provide  that a court of this state has personal jurisdiction
over any person who obtains a judgment in a defamation proceeding
outside the United States against any person who is a resident of
California, or is a person or entity amenable to jurisdiction in
California who has assets in California or may have to take actions
in California to comply with the judgment, for the purposes of
rendering declaratory relief with respect to that person's liability
for the judgment, or for the purpose of determining whether the
judgment should be deemed nonrecognizable pursuant to the act, if the
publication at issue was published in California, and the defendant
has assets in California that might be used to satisfy the foreign
defamation judgment or may have to take actions in California to
comply with the foreign defamation judgment   , 
 if a judgment was rendered in an action for defamation in a
foreign country against a person who is a resident of California or a
person or entity amenable to jurisdiction in California, and
declaratory relief with respect to liability for the judgment or a
determination is sought that the judgment is not recognizable in
California under the act, that a court has personal jurisdiction over
that person or entity if the publication at issue was published in
California, and the defendant has assets in California that might be
subject to an enforcement proceeding to satisfy the foreign-country
defamation judgment or may have to take actions in California to
comply with the foreign-country defamation judgment .
   Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no.
State-mandated local program: no.


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  SECTION 1.  Section 1716 of the Code of Civil Procedure is amended
to read:
   1716.  (a) Except as otherwise provided in subdivisions (b) and
(c), a court of this state shall recognize a foreign-country judgment
to which this chapter applies.
   (b) A court of this state shall not recognize a foreign-country
judgment if any of the following apply:
   (1) The judgment was rendered under a judicial system that does
not provide impartial tribunals or procedures compatible with the
requirements of due process of law.
   (2) The foreign court did not have personal jurisdiction over the
defendant.
   (3) The foreign court did not have jurisdiction over the subject
matter.
   (c) A court of this state is not required to recognize a
foreign-country judgment if any of the following apply:
   (1) The defendant in the proceeding in the foreign court did not
receive notice of the proceeding in sufficient time to enable the
defendant to defend.
   (2) The judgment was obtained by fraud that deprived the losing
party of an adequate opportunity to present its case.
   (3) The judgment or the cause of action or claim for relief on
which the judgment is based is repugnant to the public policy of this
state or of the United States.
   (4) The judgment conflicts with another final and conclusive
judgment.
   (5) The proceeding in the foreign court 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.
   (6) In the case of jurisdiction based only on personal service,
the foreign court was a seriously inconvenient forum for the trial of
the action.
   (7) The judgment was rendered in circumstances that raise
substantial doubt about the integrity of the rendering court with
respect to the judgment.
   (8) The specific proceeding in the foreign court leading to the
judgment was not compatible with the requirements of due process of
law. 
   (9) The cause of action resulted in a defamation judgment obtained
in a jurisdiction outside the United States, unless the court in
this state first determines that the defamation law applied in the
foreign court's adjudication provided at least as much protection for
freedom of speech and the press in that case as would be provided by
both the United States and California Constitutions.  
   (9) A court of this state has determined that the defamation law
applied by a foreign court in adjudicating a claim of defamation does
not provide at least as much protection for freedom of speech and
the press as provided by both the United States and California
Constitutions. 
   (d) If the party seeking recognition of a foreign-country judgment
has met its burden of establishing recognition of the
foreign-country judgment pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 1715,
a party resisting recognition of a foreign-country judgment has the
burden of establishing that a ground for nonrecognition stated in
subdivision (b) or (c) exists.
  SEC. 2.  Section 1717 of the Code of Civil Procedure is amended to
read:
   1717.  (a) A foreign-country judgment shall not be refused
recognition for lack of personal jurisdiction if any of the following
apply:
   (1) The defendant was served with process personally in the
foreign country.
   (2) The defendant voluntarily appeared in the proceeding, other
than for the purpose of protecting property seized or threatened with
seizure in the proceeding or of contesting the jurisdiction of the
court over the defendant.
   (3) The defendant, before the commencement of the proceeding, had
agreed to submit to the jurisdiction of the foreign court with
respect to the subject matter involved.
   (4) The defendant was domiciled in the foreign country when the
proceeding was instituted or was a corporation or other form of
business organization that had its principal place of business in, or
was organized under the laws of, the foreign country.
   (5) The defendant had a business office in the foreign country and
the proceeding in the foreign court involved a cause of action or
claim for relief arising out of business done by the defendant
through that office in the foreign country.
   (6) The defendant operated a motor vehicle or airplane in the
foreign country and the proceeding involved a cause of action or
claim for relief arising out of that operation.
   (b) The list of bases for personal jurisdiction in subdivision (a)
is not exclusive. The courts of this state may recognize bases of
personal jurisdiction other than those listed in subdivision (a) as
sufficient to support a foreign-country judgment. 
   (c) A court of this state has personal jurisdiction over any
person who obtains a judgment in a defamation proceeding outside the
United States against any person who is a resident of California, or
is a person or entity amenable to jurisdiction in California who has
assets in California or may have to take actions in California to
comply with the judgment, for the purposes of rendering declaratory
relief with respect to that person's liability for the judgment, or
for the purpose of determining whether the judgment should be deemed
nonrecognizable pursuant to Section 1716, to the fullest extent
permitted by the United States Constitution, if both of the following
apply:  
   (1) The publication at issue was published in California.
 
   (2) That resident, or person amenable to jurisdiction in
California, either (A) has assets in California that might be used to
satisfy the foreign defamation judgment, or (B) may have to take
actions in California to comply with the foreign defamation judgment.
 
   The provisions of this subdivision shall apply to persons who
obtained judgments in defamation proceedings outside the United
States both prior to, and after, January 1, 2010.  
   (c) If a judgment was rendered in an action for defamation in a
foreign country against a person who is a resident of California or a
person or entity amenable to jurisdiction in California, and
declaratory relief with respect to liability for the judgment or a
determination that the judgment is not recognizable in California
under Section 1716 is sought, a court has personal jurisdiction over
that person or entity if both of the following apply:  
   (1) The publication at issue was published in California. 

   (2) The person who is a resident, or the person or entity who is
amenable to jurisdiction in California, either (A) has assets in
California that might be subject to an enforcement proceeding to
satisfy the foreign-country defamation judgment, or (B) may have to
take actions in California to comply with the foreign-country
defamation judgment.  
   This subdivision shall apply to persons who obtained judgments in
defamation proceedings in a foreign country both prior to and after
January 1, 2010.