The EU approval of the Beijing Convention on the Judicial Sale of Ships

Az. Marco Manzone
Partner, Dardani ǀ Studio Legale
marco.manzone@dardani.it 

The recent approval by the European Union of the United Nations Convention on the International Effects of Judicial Sales of Ships, commonly known as the Beijing Convention, is an important step in the development of the international regime governing the effects of judicial sales of vessels. The Convention was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in New York on 7 December 2022 and entered into force on 17 February 2026. It was prepared by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), but originates from a draft convention on the recognition of foreign judicial sales of ships prepared by the Comité Maritime International (CMI) and approved by the CMI Assembly in 2014. The EU deposited its instrument of approval on 18 June 2026, and the Convention enters into force for the EU on 15 December 2026.

The purpose of the Convention is relatively limited but legally significant. It does not harmonise the procedure for the judicial sale of ships, but it establishes a unified regime for giving international effect to judicial sales which confer clean title on the purchaser. Essentially, a judicial sale conducted in one State Party, where it has the effect of conferring clean title, must be recognised in every other State Party, subject only to a public policy exception. The Convention also deals with related matters such as deregistration or transfer of registration, the prohibition of arrest for pre-existing claims, notice of judicial sale, certificates of judicial sale and jurisdiction to challenge the sale.

The Convention was signed on 14 March 2024 on behalf of the EU with regard to matters falling within the Union’s exclusive competence, following the authorisation granted by Council Decision (EU) 2024/414 of 21 December 2023.

The process leading to its conclusion by the EU subsequently moved forward. On 24 July 2025, the European Commission submitted to the Council a proposal for a Council Decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the EU, of the Beijing Convention, accompanied by a declaration setting out the competences of the EU at the time of conclusion. After being examined by the Working Party on Civil Law Matters, the proposal was endorsed by the Council. It then received the consent of the European Parliament and was finally adopted by the Council of the European Union on 27 April 2026.

The EU’s approval must, however, be read together with its declaration under Article 18, second paragraph, of the Convention. Article 18 allows a regional economic integration organisation to become party to the Convention, but only to the extent that its Member States have transferred competence, over matters regulated by the Convention, to that organisation. The EU declaration identifies two areas of exclusive EU competence: Article 9, concerning jurisdiction to avoid or suspend a judicial sale, in light of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, the so-called Brussels I Recast Regulation; and Article 4, concerning notice of judicial sale, in light of Regulation (EU) 2020/1784 on service of judicial and extrajudicial documents.

Article 4: notice of judicial sale

Article 4 is important because the Convention’s system depends on prior notice before the sale is completed. The judicial sale remains governed by the law of the state of judicial sale, but a certificate of judicial sale may be issued only if prior notice of the sale has been given in accordance with the Convention. Notice must be given to the ship registry, holders of registered mortgages or charges, maritime lienholders, the owner of the ship and, where applicable, the bareboat charterer and the bareboat charter registry.

For the EU, Article 4 interacts with EU rules on service of documents in civil and commercial matters. The EU declaration therefore makes clear that, to the extent Article 4 may affect Regulation (EU) 2020/1784 or alter its scope, this is a matter of EU exclusive competence. This implies that the cross-border service or transmission aspects fall within EU competence.

Article 9: jurisdiction to avoid or suspend a judicial sale

Article 9 gives exclusive jurisdiction to the courts of the state of judicial sale to hear claims or applications seeking to avoid the judicial sale, suspend its effects, or challenge the issuance of the certificate of judicial sale. Courts of other states parties must decline jurisdiction in respect of such claims.

This provision is central to the Convention’s purpose. A purchaser at a judicial sale needs certainty that the sale will not be re-litigated in every jurisdiction where the ship may later trade, be registered, financed or arrested. Article 9 therefore protects the finality of the sale by concentrating challenges before the courts of the state where the sale was conducted. At EU level, this touches upon the Brussels I Recast Regulation, which explains why the EU identified Article 9 as falling within its exclusive external competence.

The effect of EU approval

The EU’s approval is therefore significant, but its legal implications must be assessed within the limits of the Union’s competence. As noted above, the EU becomes a party to the Convention only in respect of the matters for which competence has been transferred to it and identified in its declaration under Article 18 of the Beijing Convention. The Member States remain competent for the remaining parts of the Convention. Accordingly, EU approval does not mean that the Convention is now fully applicable in all EU Member States.

As matters stand, the UN Treaty Collection records 34 signatories and five parties. Among EU Member States, Spain has ratified the Convention, while Belgium, Croatia, Cyprus, Italy, Luxembourg and Malta have signed but not yet ratified.

Conclusion

The EU approval is nevertheless an important lever. It confirms institutional support for the Convention at EU level, clarifies the relationship between the Convention and existing EU rules on jurisdiction and service of documents, and may encourage further Member States to proceed with ratification. However, unless and until individual Member States ratify or accede to the Convention, its full operation in those Member States remains limited. The EU’s approval concerns only the matters covered by its declaration of competence, namely Article 4 and Article 9, and only to the extent that those provisions may affect common EU rules or alter their scope.