12-664.Standards for recognition of foreign-country judgment.

Article XII. Judgments - Enforcement · Part 6. Foreign Judgments and Foreign-Money Claims · Last amended 2012 · Last verified July 20, 2026

In one sentenceRequires Illinois courts to recognize a qualifying foreign-country money judgment unless it fails core due-process or jurisdictional tests, or unless the resisting party proves a separate discretionary ground like fraud, notice failure, or conflict with public policy.

Full Text of 735 ILCS 5/12-664

Text sizeJump to: (a) (b) (c) (d)

(a) Except as otherwise provided in subsections (b) and (c),

a court of this State shall recognize a foreign-country judgment to which this Act applies.

(b) A court of this State may not recognize a foreign- country judgment if:

(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; or

(3) the foreign court did not have jurisdiction over the subject matter.

(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 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; or

(8) the specific proceeding in the foreign court leading to the judgment was not compatible with the requirements of due process of law.

(d) A party resisting recognition of a foreign-country judgment has the burden of establishing that a ground for nonrecognition stated in subsection (b) or (c) exists.

Plain-English Summary

Subsection (a) states the baseline: a court of this State shall recognize a foreign-country judgment covered by the Act, subject to the exceptions in subsections (b) and (c). That baseline of mandatory recognition mirrors, in spirit, the full faith and credit obligation for sister-state judgments, but the exceptions that follow are where the two schemes diverge sharply.

Subsection (b) lists mandatory grounds for non-recognition, meaning the court may not recognize the judgment at all if any applies: the rendering judicial system lacked impartial tribunals or due-process-compatible procedures, the foreign court lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendant, or the foreign court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction.

Subsection (c) lists discretionary grounds the court need not honor but may: inadequate notice, fraud that deprived the losing party of a fair opportunity to defend, a judgment or cause of action repugnant to Illinois or U.S. public policy, conflict with another final judgment, violation of a forum-selection agreement, a seriously inconvenient forum where jurisdiction rested only on personal service, doubt about the rendering court's integrity, or a specific proceeding incompatible with due process. This public-policy ground has no counterpart for sister-state judgments, which cannot be challenged on public-policy grounds under full faith and credit. Subsection (d) puts the burden of proving any of these grounds on the party resisting recognition.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does Illinois presume a foreign-country judgment is enforceable?

Yes, subject to the exceptions that follow. Subsection (a) requires recognition of a covered foreign-country judgment unless subsection (b) or (c) applies.

When must a court refuse to recognize a foreign-country judgment?

When the rendering system lacked impartial tribunals or due-process-compatible procedures, the foreign court lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendant, or it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction, under subsection (b).

When may, but need not, a court refuse recognition?

Under subsection (c), for grounds like inadequate notice, fraud, conflict with Illinois or U.S. public policy, conflict with another judgment, breach of a forum-selection agreement, a seriously inconvenient forum, doubts about the court's integrity, or a due-process-incompatible proceeding.

Can a foreign-country judgment be challenged as against Illinois public policy?

Yes, under subsection (c)(3). That stands in contrast to sister-state judgments, which full faith and credit generally shields from a public-policy challenge.

Who bears the burden of proving a ground for non-recognition?

The party resisting recognition of the foreign-country judgment, under subsection (d).

Amendment History

(Source: P.A. 97-140, eff. 1-1-12.)

Source & verification. Section text and amendment history are reproduced verbatim from the Illinois Compiled Statutes, published by the Illinois Compiled Statutes, Illinois General Assembly / Legislative Reference Bureau. Last verified July 20, 2026. · Official source

Also known as: refusing to recognize a foreign country judgment Illinoispublic policy defense to a foreign judgment Illinoisdue process challenge foreign country judgmentmandatory grounds for nonrecognition Illinois