§ 9-12-119.Situations not covered by article
Chapter 12. Verdict and Judgment · Article 5. Uniform Foreign-Country Money Judgments Recognition Act · Last amended 2015 · Last verified July 17, 2026
Full Text of § 9-12-119
Plain-English Summary
This closing Code section is a savings clause. It states that the article does not prevent the recognition, under principles of comity or otherwise, of a foreign-country judgment that falls outside the article's own scope. In other words, the article supplies one path to recognition, but not the only one available under Georgia law.
That matters because the article's own applicability rules leave real gaps. Judgments for taxes, fines or other penalties, and divorce, support, maintenance, or other domestic-relations awards fall outside the article under Code Section 9-12-112, even when they involve money. So do foreign-country judgments that do not grant or deny recovery of a sum of money at all, such as an injunction or a declaratory judgment, since the article's threshold test in that same section is framed around monetary judgments.
For all of those excluded categories, this section preserves whatever avenues for recognition already existed apart from the article — comity being the traditional doctrine under which courts extend recognition to foreign judgments as a matter of respect and reciprocity, separate from any statute. The article, in short, occupies its own defined territory without displacing the broader legal landscape around recognizing foreign-country judgments generally.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this Code section preserve for foreign-country judgments that fall outside the article's scope?
The ability to seek recognition of such a judgment under principles of comity or other legal doctrines that exist apart from this article.
What kinds of foreign-country judgments fall outside the article, based on the exclusions in Code Section 9-12-112?
Judgments for taxes, fines or other penalties, and judgments for divorce, support, maintenance, or other domestic-relations matters, along with judgments that do not grant or deny recovery of a sum of money at all.
Does this article displace comity as a basis for recognizing a foreign judgment?
No. This section specifically states that the article does not prevent recognition under comity or otherwise, for judgments the article itself does not reach.
Does a foreign-country judgment for a non-money remedy, like an injunction, fall within this article's coverage?
The article's threshold applicability rule is built around judgments that grant or deny recovery of a sum of money, so a purely non-money judgment such as an injunction falls outside the article's own scope, leaving this section's preservation of other recognition avenues relevant to it.
What is the overall function of this Code section within the article?
It closes the article by confirming that the article's rules are additive rather than exclusive — they do not cut off other established ways Georgia courts may recognize foreign-country judgments that the article itself does not cover.
Amendment History
Ga. L. 1975, p. 479, § 7; Code 1981, § 9-12-119, as redesignated by Ga. L. 2015, p. 996, § 2-1/SB 65.