How to Get U.S. Judgments Enforced in Germany (2026): Exequatur, § 328 ZPO, Costs & Timelines

Winning a money judgment in a U. S. court is only half the battle when the debtor’s assets sit in Germany. Understanding how to get U. S. judgments enforced in Germany requires navigating a distinct procedural framework, the exequatur, that has no direct equivalent in American practice. Germany’s 2026 commercial-court reforms, which expand the availability of English-language proceedings at designated Landgerichte (Regional Courts), have made the country a more accessible venue for cross-border creditors. At the same time, the five statutory grounds for refusal under § 328 of the Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO, German Code of Civil Procedure) remain fully in force, and a single misstep in document preparation or service of process can derail the entire application.

This guide provides in-house counsel, U. S. creditors and collection lawyers with a step-by-step roadmap, covering legal requirements, documents, realistic costs and timelines, current as of July 2026.

At a Glance, Quick Checklist for U.S. Creditors

Before diving into the detail, here is a condensed action list for busy readers. Each step is expanded in the sections that follow.

1. Conduct an asset search in Germany, confirm the debtor holds reachable assets (bank accounts, real property, receivables).
2. Obtain a certified copy of the U.S. judgment, request from the issuing court clerk, with full docket entries.
3. Secure an apostille, issued by the relevant U.S. Secretary of State (state courts) or the U.S. Department of State (federal courts).
4. Commission a certified German translation, by a sworn translator (beeidigter Übersetzer).
5. Collect proof of proper service, Hague Service Convention certificate or detailed affidavit of service.
6. Instruct German counsel and file the exequatur application at the competent Landgericht.
7. Prepare for § 328 ZPO defences, assemble evidence on jurisdiction, service and reciprocity in advance.
8. Convert the recognised judgment into a Vollstreckungsurteil (execution judgment under § 722 ZPO) and initiate enforcement measures.

Quick Answer, Can a U.S. Judgment Be Enforced in Germany?

Yes. Final judgments issued by United States courts in civil and commercial matters can be recognised and enforced in Germany. Because no bilateral treaty on judgment recognition exists between the United States and Germany, the process is governed entirely by the German Code of Civil Procedure, specifically § 328 ZPO (conditions for recognition) and §§ 722–723 ZPO (execution judgment).

Recognition is not automatic. The U.S. creditor must file an application at a German Regional Court (Landgericht) and demonstrate that none of the five grounds for refusal listed in § 328(1) ZPO applies. If the court is satisfied, it issues a declaration of enforceability in Germany, the Vollstreckungsurteil, which then permits the creditor to use standard German enforcement measures against the debtor’s assets.

The German court does not re-examine the merits of the underlying U.S. dispute. Its review is limited to the procedural safeguards prescribed by § 328 ZPO. Industry observers expect the 2026 commercial-court reforms to accelerate processing times at courts offering English-language commercial chambers, though the substantive recognition requirements remain unchanged.

How German Law Recognises Foreign Judgments, The Legal Framework

The enforcement of foreign judgments in Germany follows a two-track system. For judgments originating in EU Member States, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 (the Brussels I Recast Regulation) provides a streamlined recognition and enforcement mechanism that largely eliminates the exequatur requirement. U.S. judgments, however, fall outside this regime entirely.

Non-EU judgments, including those from every U.S. state and federal court, are subject to the autonomous German rules in §§ 328 and 722–723 ZPO. Under § 328(1) ZPO, a foreign judgment is recognised by operation of law provided none of five enumerated grounds for refusal is present. Recognition does not require a separate court order; it occurs as an incidental question whenever the judgment is relied upon. Enforcement, however, does require a court order: the creditor must obtain an execution judgment (Vollstreckungsurteil) pursuant to § 722(1) ZPO.

Key Statutes and Interpretive Guidance

The primary statutory provisions are §§ 328, 722 and 723 ZPO, all published in the official federal law gazette and available through the Federal Ministry of Justice’s Gesetze im Internet portal. German courts, led by the Bundesgerichtshof (BGH, Federal Court of Justice), have developed a substantial body of case law interpreting each ground for refusal. The BGH has consistently held that § 328 ZPO must be interpreted narrowly: recognition is the rule, refusal the exception. Academic commentary, including comparative analyses of how § 328 mirrors and diverges from U.S. recognition standards under the Uniform Foreign-Country Money Judgments Recognition Act, reinforces that Germany’s framework is broadly creditor-friendly, provided procedural prerequisites are met.

For creditors, the practical implication is clear: the burden of proving a ground for refusal rests on the party opposing recognition. A well-prepared application that pre-empts the most common objections stands a high chance of success.

Step-by-Step Exequatur Procedure: How to Get U.S. Judgments Enforced in Germany

The exequatur process in Germany can be broken into three phases: preparation, filing and court proceedings, and conversion to an enforceable title. Each phase requires careful attention to documentation and procedural rules.

Competent Court and Filing Mechanics

The application for a Vollstreckungsurteil must be filed at the Landgericht (Regional Court) that has general jurisdiction over the debtor. If the debtor is a company, this is typically the court at the location of the company’s registered seat in Germany. If the debtor is an individual, the court at the debtor’s place of residence applies. Where neither a registered seat nor a residence can be identified, the location of the debtor’s assets in Germany may establish jurisdiction.

The application is initiated by filing a Klageschrift (statement of claim) in which the creditor requests issuance of the execution judgment. The statement must identify the foreign judgment, summarise the amounts claimed (including accrued interest), and assert that no grounds for refusal under § 328 ZPO exist. German counsel admitted to the bar must sign the filing; representation by a Rechtsanwalt is mandatory at the Landgericht level.

Required Documents, Filing Checklist

Ensuring every document is complete before filing avoids costly adjournments. Courts routinely return incomplete applications and set deadlines for supplementary filings, which can add weeks or months to the timeline.

Proof of Service and the Hague Service Convention

Defective service is the ground most frequently invoked to block recognition of U.S. judgments in Germany. Under § 328(1) No. 2 ZPO, recognition is refused if the defendant was not served in accordance with the law of the originating state, or, critically, if service did not afford sufficient time and opportunity to defend.

Both the United States and Germany are parties to the 1965 Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents (the Hague Service Convention). Where the defendant was domiciled in Germany at the time of the U.S. proceedings, service should have been effected through the channels prescribed by that Convention. A certificate of service issued by the German Central Authority provides robust evidence that the Hague Service Convention was complied with.

Default judgments present heightened risk. If the U.S. defendant never appeared, German courts will scrutinise service with particular care. Creditors should gather every available piece of evidence, return receipts, process-server affidavits, tracking confirmations, and present them in a comprehensive exhibit package alongside the exequatur application.

Grounds for Refusal Under § 328 ZPO, What to Watch For

Section 328(1) ZPO lists five grounds on which recognition of a foreign judgment must be refused. Understanding each ground is essential for creditors seeking enforcement of foreign judgments in Germany, because the debtor’s defence strategy will almost always centre on one or more of them.

• No. 1, Lack of indirect jurisdiction. The court of the originating state did not have jurisdiction under the principles of German private international law. German courts apply their own jurisdictional rules hypothetically: would a German court have had jurisdiction on the same facts? If not, the foreign court’s jurisdiction is not recognised.
• No. 2, Defective service of process. The defendant was not served the document initiating proceedings in proper time, or was not served at all, and was thus unable to defend. This is the most litigated ground in U.S.–Germany cases.
• No. 3, Irreconcilability with a German judgment. The foreign judgment conflicts with a German judgment between the same parties, or with an earlier foreign judgment that is eligible for recognition in Germany.
• No. 4, Violation of public policy (ordre public). Recognition would be manifestly incompatible with essential principles of German law. German courts set a high threshold: routine disagreements about quantum or legal reasoning are insufficient. Punitive-damages awards, however, have historically triggered ordre public scrutiny.
• No. 5, Lack of reciprocity. The state in which the judgment was rendered does not, in comparable circumstances, recognise German judgments.

Reciprocity Between Germany and the United States

The reciprocity requirement under § 328(1) No. 5 ZPO is tested at the level of the individual U.S. state. Because recognition of foreign judgments in the United States is governed by state law, primarily through the Uniform Foreign-Country Money Judgments Recognition Act or its predecessors, German courts assess whether the specific state from which the judgment originates would recognise a comparable German judgment. In practice, the vast majority of U.S. states satisfy this requirement. German courts have generally affirmed reciprocity with U.S. jurisdictions, though creditors should confirm the position for the relevant state and include supporting authority in their filing.

Public Policy, Punitive Damages and Beyond

The ordre public defence is narrow but important. German courts have repeatedly held that the punitive-damages component of a U.S. judgment may be refused recognition on public-policy grounds, because German law does not recognise damages intended to punish rather than compensate. The compensatory portion of the same judgment, however, can still be enforced. Creditors holding judgments with a punitive-damages element should separate the compensatory and punitive components clearly in their filings. Early indications suggest that German courts continue to apply the same analytical framework in 2026, treating truly excessive or penal awards as contrary to the ordre public while enforcing the compensatory balance.

Costs of Enforcement in Germany, Estimates and Fee Structures

One of the most common questions from U.S. creditors is what it actually costs to enforce a judgment in Germany. The answer depends on the amount in dispute, the complexity of the debtor’s objections, and the enforcement measures required. Below is a realistic breakdown of the costs of enforcement in Germany across the main procedural stages.

Court fees are calculated on a statutory basis according to the Gerichtskostengesetz (Court Fees Act) and scale with the value in dispute. Attorney fees may be agreed on an hourly basis or calculated under the Rechtsanwaltsvergütungsgesetz (Attorneys’ Remuneration Act). For high-value judgments, hourly fee arrangements are standard. Translation costs vary by document length and complexity, but creditors should budget approximately EUR 50–80 per page for certified translations from English to German.

An uncontested exequatur, where the debtor does not raise objections, can proceed from filing to enforceable title in roughly two to four months. Contested proceedings, particularly those involving satellite litigation over service or public policy, can extend to twelve months or more, with appeal to the Oberlandesgericht (Higher Regional Court) adding further time.

After Recognition, Converting to Vollstreckungsurteil and Enforcement Measures

Once the German court confirms that none of the § 328 ZPO refusal grounds applies, it issues the execution judgment under § 722 ZPO. This Vollstreckungsurteil transforms the U.S. judgment into a German enforceable title, functionally equivalent to a judgment rendered by a German court. The creditor can then deploy the full range of enforcement measures available under the German Code of Civil Procedure, §§ 704 et seq. ZPO.

Enforcement Tactics, Companies vs. Individuals

The choice of enforcement measure depends on the nature of the debtor and the type of assets available.

• Bank-account garnishment (Kontopfändung). The most common and often most effective measure. The creditor obtains a garnishment order (Pfändungs- und Überweisungsbeschluss) from the enforcement court, which is served on the debtor’s bank. Funds are frozen and transferred to the creditor.
• Garnishment of receivables. If the debtor is a company, trade receivables owed to it by third parties can be garnished. This requires identifying the third-party debtors and serving them with the garnishment order.
• Seizure of movable assets. A court bailiff (Gerichtsvollzieher) may seize physical assets at the debtor’s premises. This measure is less common for commercial debts but can be effective against individuals.
• Enforcement against real property. The creditor may seek a compulsory mortgage (Zwangshypothek) on German real estate owned by the debtor, or petition for forced sale (Zwangsversteigerung).
• Disclosure of assets (Vermögensauskunft). The creditor can compel the debtor to provide a sworn statement listing all assets. Non-compliance can result in arrest warrants.

For corporate debtors, combining bank-account garnishment with receivables garnishment typically yields the fastest recovery. Where the debtor’s asset position is unclear, beginning with a disclosure-of-assets order provides the intelligence needed to target specific measures.

Practical Defences and How Creditors Should Prepare

The most effective way to secure enforcement is to anticipate and neutralise the debtor’s likely objections before filing. Creditors should prepare a litigation-ready evidence package that addresses each § 328 ZPO ground proactively.

• Jurisdiction. Include a legal memorandum showing that the U.S. court’s jurisdictional basis corresponds to a recognised basis under German private international law (e.g., the debtor’s domicile, place of performance, or contractual choice of forum).
• Service. Assemble a complete service file. If the Hague Service Convention was used, include the certificate. If alternative service was authorised by the U.S. court, provide the court order and evidence of actual notice.
• Reciprocity. Attach a short legal opinion or case-law compilation confirming that the specific U.S. state recognises German judgments.
• Public policy. If the judgment includes any element that could attract ordre public scrutiny, such as punitive damages, treble damages, or extensive pre-judgment interest, address the issue head-on and, where possible, disaggregate the compensatory component.

A creditor who files with this evidence pre-assembled substantially reduces the debtor’s ability to delay proceedings through procedural objections.

Practical Checklist and Recommended Next Steps

For U.S. creditors ready to move forward, the following checklist summarises the complete process of how to get U.S. judgments enforced in Germany in eight actionable steps.

1. Conduct an asset search, confirm the debtor has reachable assets in Germany.
2. Obtain a certified copy of the U.S. judgment with full docket entries.
3. Secure a Hague Apostille from the relevant U.S. authority.
4. Commission a certified German translation of all documents.
5. Compile evidence of proper service (Hague Service certificate or equivalent).
6. Instruct admitted German counsel and file the exequatur application at the competent Landgericht.
7. Prepare a pre-emptive defence package addressing jurisdiction, reciprocity and public policy.
8. Upon recognition, obtain the Vollstreckungsurteil (§ 722 ZPO) and initiate enforcement measures, bank garnishment, asset seizure or compulsory mortgage as appropriate.

Engaging a qualified German commercial litigation lawyer at the earliest stage is strongly recommended. German counsel can advise on the debtor’s asset position, the most efficient enforcement measures, and the court most likely to handle the application promptly, particularly at courts now offering English-language commercial chambers under the 2026 reforms.

Sources

1. Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO) § 328, Recognition of Foreign Judgments (Gesetze im Internet)
2. Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO) § 722, Execution Judgment (Gesetze im Internet)
3. Bundesgerichtshof (BGH), Federal Court of Justice Published Decisions
4. Hague Conference on Private International Law (HCCH), Service Convention & Apostille Convention
5. EUR-Lex, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 (Brussels I Recast)
6. Bundesministerium der Justiz (Federal Ministry of Justice)
7. SMU Scholar, Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Money Judgments (Academic Analysis)
8. Deutscher Anwaltverein (DAV), German Bar Association