Important Notice: Our web hosting provider recently started charging us for additional visits, which was unexpected. In response, we're seeking donations. Depending on the situation, we may explore different monetization options for our Community and Expert Contributors. It's crucial to provide more returns for their expertise and offer more Expert Validated Answers or AI Validated Answers. Learn more about our hosting issue here.

What is the difference between signing, ratifying and acceding to a Hague Convention?

0
Posted

What is the difference between signing, ratifying and acceding to a Hague Convention?

0

By signing a Convention, a State expresses, in principle, its intention to become a Party to the Convention. However, signature does not, in any way, oblige a State to take further action (towards ratification or not). Ratification involves the legal obligation for the ratifying State to apply the Convention. According to the Hague Conference’s terminology, ratification is, in general, reserved for Member States exclusively. There are, however, some exceptions. These include the Convention of 22 December 1986 on the Law Applicable to Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, which is open for signature and ratification by all States with no distinction, and the Convention of 29 May 1993 on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption, which is open for signature and ratification by all States that have participated in the Seventeenth Session. Others States wishing to become a Party to a Hague Convention may accede. This, however, is only possible onc

Related Questions

What is your question?

*Sadly, we had to bring back ads too. Hopefully more targeted.

Experts123