Printer friendly version
EmailInter-American Convention on Letters Rogatoryand Additional Protocol(Inter-American Service Convention)
Disclaimer: THE INFORMATION IN THIS CIRCULAR RELATING TO THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS OF SPECIFIC FOREIGN COUNTRIES IS PROVIDED FOR GENERAL INFORMATION ONLY AND MAY NOT BE TOTALLY ACCURATE IN A PARTICULAR CASE. QUESTIONS INVOLVING INTERPRETATION OF SPECIFIC FOREIGN LAWS SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO FOREIGN COUNSEL OR THE FOREIGN CENTRAL AUTHORITY FOR THE CONVENTION.
In Force: ARGENTINA, BRAZIL, CHILE, COLOMBIA, ECUADOR, GUATEMALA, MEXICO, PANAMA, PARAGUAY, PERU, UNITED STATES, URUGUAY and VENEZUELA.
U.S. Central Authority: Office of International Judicial Assistance, Civil Division, Department of Justice, 1100 L St., N.W., Room 11006, Washington, D.C. 20530, tel: (202) 307-0983; fax: (202) 514-6584.
Summary: The United States has a treaty relationship only with countries which are a party to the Convention and the Additional Protocol. The treaty provides a mechanism for service of documents by a foreign central authority. Requests are prepared on a Convention form and transmitted via the U.S. Central Authority in the Department of Justice. The text of the Convention and Additional Protocol are self-explanatory, but see the reservations and declarations each country made on accession to the treaty available in the Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory, Law Digest Volume, Selected International Conventions. Despite the title of the Convention, no formal letter rogatory in the traditional sense is required. The Convention form serves that purpose.
Citations: S. Treaty Doc. 98-27, 98th Cong., 2d sess., (1984), pp. III-V, XII.; 14 Int''l Leg. Mat. 339 (March 1975); 18 Int''l Leg. Mat. 1238 (1984); Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory, Law Digest Volume, Selected International Conventions; See also, Ristau, Int''l Judicial Assistance, Civil and Commercial, Int''l Law Institute, Vol. 1, Sec. 7-1-5, p. 257-274.16; Epstein, International Litigation: A Guide to Jurisdiction, Practice and Strategy, Prentice Hall Law & Business, 1994 supp., Sec. 4.05, p. 4-24 - 4-28; Born & Westin, International Civil Litigation in United States Courts, (1989), p. 136-137; and Nash, Cumulative Digest of United States Practice in International Law, 1981-1988, p. 1555-1564 (1994).
OAS Treaty Database: The texts of the Convention and Additional Protocol and information about recent accessions is also available through the OAS Internet Treaty Database under Documents/Treaties and Conventions.
Scope of the Convention: Article 2 provides that the scope of the Convention is limited to civil and commercial matters. Article 16 permits states to apply the Convention to criminal and administrative matters. Only Chile has declared that it will apply the Convention in such cases. See Ristau, Vol. 1, Sec. 7-1-4, p. 259-261 (1995 supp.). For information about the use of formal letters rogatory to effect service in criminal or administrative matters, see our general Preparation of Letters Rogatory and Service of Process flyers. For prosecutors, in countries where a Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters (MLAT) treaty applies, the MLAT procedure may offer another alternative. Prosecutors may contact the Office of International Affairs, Criminal Division, Department of Justice for additional information (202) 514-0015 for additional information about MLATs. See our general flyer Obtaining Evidence Abroad for a list of MLAT treaties now in force.
Mandatory Convention Forms USM-272/272A: Submit a request for service in a foreign country party to the Convention and Additional Protocol on a form USM-272/272A, available at the office of any United States Marshal. See also, Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory, Law Digest Volume, Selected International Conventions; Ristau, Vol. 1, Sec. 7-4-5, p. 274.3 (1995 supp.); Epstein, App.-85 - App.-99, 1994 supp.; and Born & Westin, International Civil Litigation in United States Courts, (1989), Appendix E, p. 670-684. (See also, Department of Justice instructions to U.S. Marshal''s Service dated 1/9/90.) According to that instruction, all requests for information regarding the treaty or completion of the forms should be directed to the U.S. Central Authority in the Department of Justice. See Ristau, Vol. 1, Sec. 7-2-3(1), p. 264 (1995 supp.) re use of the forms.
Number of Copies: The request for service includes the following: (a) the original and two copies of the USM-272 and USM 272A forms and three copies of the summons and complaint or other documents to be served. See Ristau, Vol. 1, Sec. 7-2-3(4), p. 266 (1995 supp.).
Annotating the Summons and Complaint: Article 3 of the Additional Protocol calls for the "letters rogatory" to be prepared on the Convention forms (USM 272/272A). The United States has taken the position that the USM-272/272A satisfies this requirement, and that a separate, formal letter rogatory is not/not in fact required, provided that the Convention forms are utilized and that the summons and complaint (or other comparable document) reflect that the person to be served is located in the specified foreign country. Moreover, the complaint should reflect that because the person to be served is in the specified foreign country, service is to be sought pursuant to the Inter-American Convention on Letters Rogatory and Additional Protocol to which the United States and the specified country are parties. See Ristau, Vol. 1, Sec. 7-2-3(2), p. 265 (1995 supp.).
Translations: While it is not necessary to translate responses to the USM-272, USM 272A into the language of the foreign country, the documents to be served, such as a summons and complaint, must be translated into the foreign language. Some commentaries recommend translation of the forms as well to help ensure more timely assistance. See Ristau, Vol. 1, Sec. 7-2-3(3), p. 266 (1995 Supp.).
Signature of Clerk of Court in U.S. Required: Unlike the Hague Service Convention, the Inter-American Convention requires that the Convention form bear the seal and signature of the judicial or authority of the country of origin and the signature and stamp of the U.S. Central Authority. The clerk of the court in the U.S. where the action is pending must place their seal and signature on pages 2 and 5 of the USM-272 and USM-272A on the left hand side "Signature and stamp of the judicial or other adjudicatory authority of the state of origin". The U.S. Central Authority (Department of Justice) will execute the signature/stamp on the right hand side of page 2 and 5 of the USM-272/272A. See Ristau, Vol. 1, Sec. 7-2-5, p. 267 (1995 supp.). Article 2 provides that authorities competent to request service include judicial or other adjudicatory authorities, the latter term has not been defined.
Fees: Article 5 of the Additional Protocol provides that processing of requests shall be free of charge. However, it also provides that a state party to the Convention and Additional Protocol may seek payment by parties for services in accordance with local law. Article 6 of the Additional Protocol provides that each state shall attach a schedule of services and costs to its instrument of ratification or accession. Article 7 of the Additional Protocol provides that states may charge no fees based on reciprocity. Some foreign countries charge fees of $25.00 to the foreign central authority. Mexico and Argentina have made declarations that they do not charge the fee. Other countries party to the Convention and Additional Protocol have been silent on the subject. Therefore, if service is sought in countries other than Mexico and Argentina, a certified check or money order in the amount of $25.00 made payable to the foreign central authority should be forwarded to the U.S. Authority with the USM-272/272A and the documents to be served. If no fee is charged the check will be returned. See Epstein, Sec. 4.05, p. 4-27 (1994 supp.); and Ristau, Vol. 1, Sec. 7-3-3, p. 270-271 (1995 supp.).
Proof of Service: The foreign central authority will execute page 7 of the forms as proof of service. See Ristau, Vol. 1, Sec. 7-3-4, p. 271 (1995 supp.).
Special Note Re Border States: Article 7 of the Convention provides that courts in border areas of the states parties may directly execute the letters rogatory contemplated in the Convention and such letters rogatory shall not require legalization. The U.S. Central Authority advises that border states such as Texas and even Florida have transmitted requests directly to foreign Central Authorities. The U.S. Central Authority advises that if attorneys representing clients in border states do transmit requests directly to foreign Central Authorities, proof of service is transmitted to the U.S. Central Authority. It is therefore imperative that the somewhere on the request it be stated where the executed request should be returned. The U.S. Central Authority would prefer that this information include the name and address of the attorney. Apparently, clerks of court in border states have be unable to identify the case when the executed request is returned by the U.S. Central authority. The U.S. Central Authority also advises that Article 7 notwithstanding, Mexico requires that a request transmitted from a border state to the Mexican Central Authority be fully authenticated with the seal of the Mexican embassy or consulate in the U.S.
Exclusivity of the Convention: The "Inter-American Service Convention" does reflect an effort by Inter-American countries to establish uniform procedures and may become more practically effective over time. In several reported and unreported cases, U.S. courts have held that the Convention is not the exclusive method of service for U.S. courts in countries party to the Convention. See Kreimerman v. Casa Veerkamp, S.A. 22 F 3d 634 (5th Cir. 1994); Mayztexil S.A. v. Liztez U.S.A., Inc., 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6663, S.D.N.Y. No. 92-Civ 452855, 5/19/94; Taylor v. Costa Cruises, Inc., 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11435; S.D.N.Y. No. 90, CIV 2630 (K.C.) 8/3/92; Pizzabiocche v. Vinelli, 772 F Supp. 1245, M.D. Fla. (1991). See Ristau, Vol. 1, Sec. 7-4-4, p. 274-274.2.
Time Frame: Time required to execute a Convention request is not much faster than the cumbersome letter rogatory procedure in some countries. Generally it can take 6 months to a year for a request to be executed. The U.S. Central Authority advises that Argentina and Peru have succeeded in processing requests more quickly, generally within three months.
Practical Notes on Operation of the Convention: There have been some practical problems with implementation of the Convention and Additional Protocol in certain countries. For example, some countries which have become parties to the Convention and Additional Protocol either have not designated a Central Authority or have not established the bureaucratic machinery to efficiently execute requests. The U.S. Central Authority advises that Venezuela is currently not executing requests forwarded to its Central Authority (April 1997). The Departments of State and Justice are exploring these problems. In some cases foreign countries claim never to have received requests transmitted by the U.S. Central Authority. To counter this, the U.S. Central Authority began transmitting requests by registered mail, however return receipts were never returned signed. However, the U.S. Central Authority has observed some success by foreign Central Authorities in accomplishing service within a reasonable period of time and it is expected that as foreign Central Authorities become more experienced the procedure will become more efficient as time goes on.
Other Methods of Service:
Is Eventual Enforcement of a Judgment Abroad Anticipated: Generally, the decision whether or not to utilize the Convention method of serving documents depends on whether other methods of service are acceptable under international law, under the laws of the foreign country and under U.S. federal or state law. If eventual enforcement of a judgment is foreseen, it may be prudent to seek guidance from a foreign attorney regarding the best method of service to employ. Lists of foreign attorneys prepared by U.S. embassies and consulates abroad are available from this office.
Service by Mail: Neither the Convention nor the Additional Protocol expressly provide for service by mail. Local (foreign) law would determine whether service by mail is acceptable in that country. But see, FTC v. Compagnie de Saint-Gobain-Pont-a-Mousson, 636 F. 2d 1327, n. 150 (D.C. Cir. 1980) on the issue of service via international registered mail when the document to be served is not compulsory or punitive when there is no treaty obligation to refrain from such methods of service. See Ristau, Vol. 1, Sec. 7-3-5(2), p. 271 (1995 supp.).
Service by Formal Letters Rogatory - Using Diplomatic Channel: Although Article 4 of the Convention allows for the continued transmittal of formal letters rogatory requesting service of process utilizing the traditional diplomatic and consular channel, Article 1 of the Additional Protocol''s provision quoted above mandates that requests must be transmitted via the central authority. See Ristau, Vol. 1, Sec. 7-3-5(3), p. 271-272 (1995 supp.). Moreover, the U.S. Central Authority advises that it has been informed when a request is sent outside the Central Authority channel, foreign authorities return the request unexecuted with instructions to submit the request through the Central Authority under the Convention. Confusion about the use of the diplomatic channel continues. The U.S. Central Authority advises, for example, that a number of countries party to the Convention require that the U.S. Central Authority transmit the request to the foreign Central Authority through the foreign embassy in Washington, D.C., although this contradicts the purpose of the Convention.
U.S. Reservation Re Obtaining Evidence: In acceding the Convention, the United States made a reservation pursuant to Article 2(b) of the Inter-American Convention on Letters Rogatory, letters rogatory that pertain to obtaining evidence are excluded from the operation of the Convention between the United States and other countries party to the Convention. Contact this office for information about obtaining evidence.
Service in the U.S. Under the Convention: For incoming requests from foreign treaty countries for service in the U.S., the Office of International Judicial Assistance in the Department of Justice will forward the requests to the appropriate U.S. Marshal''s offices for service and processing in the same manner as those received under the Hague Service Convention. The U.S. is required to charge a reciprocal fee for service in the U.S. of $25.00 payable to the U.S. Treasurer for requests from any country which charges a fee for requests for service in the foreign country.
Foreign Central Authorities: According to the Organization of American States, the following are addresses of foreign central authorities:
ARGENTINA
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Reconquista 402
1405 Buenos Aires
Argentina
tel: (011) (54) (01) 3113113, 3110188, 3113999
No Fee.
BRAZIL
Esplanada dos Ministérios
Ed. Sede do Ministério da Justica
Bloco "T" - 4 andar, sala 418
Autoridade Central
Secretaria Especial dos Direitos Humanos
Brasilia, DF
70.064-900
tel: (61) 429-3481
fax: (61) 226-2971
CHILE
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Compania Esq.
Morande, Ex edificio Deo
Congreso
Santiago, Chile
COLOMBIA
Oficina de Cooperacion Judicial
Subsecretaria de Asuntos Consulares
del Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores
Carrera 6, No. 9-46
Santafe de Bogota, D.C.
Colombia
tel. 011-571-3814000, ext. 3103 or 3445
Fax: 011-57-1-286-6055 or 286-1813
ECUADOR
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Departmento de Juridico
Carrion y Diez de Agosto
Quito, Ecuador
tel: (011) (593) (02) 230100
Contact: Sr. Diego Cordovez, Minister
GUATEMALA
Presidencia de la Corte Suprema de Justica
3ER Nivel
Centro Civico
21 Calle 7-70, Zona 1
Guatemala City
Guatemala, C.A.
tel: (011) (502) (2) 232-0516, extension 4000
Contact: Dr. Edmundo Zasquez, President
MEXICO
Direccion General De Asuntos Juridicos
Direccion Juridicio Contenciosa
Departamento De Exhortos Y
Relaciones Con Embajadas
Secretaria De Relaciones Exteriores
Flores Magon No. 1, Col. Tlaltelolco
Mexico, D.F., Mexico
tel: (011) (905) 782 3624
No Fee. Mexico does not consider service by private individuals such as attorneys, investigators or private process servers
to be valid in Mexico.
PANAMA
Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores
Calle 24, Plaza Porras
Panama 1, Republic of Panama
PARAGUAY
Ministerio de Relacciones Exteriores
Jeoleary y Eayala
Asuncion, Paraguay
tel: (011) (595) (21) 444 457
PERU
(1) Documents can be forwarded to the Embassy of Peru in Washington, D.C.
| Embassy of Peru Consular Section (Attn: Mr. Schialer) 1700 Massachusetts Ave. N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 |
Paseo de la Republica
SN Lima 1, Peru
tel: (011) (51) (14) 284853, 283690
URUGUAY
Ministry of Education and Culture
(Asesoria Autoridad Central de Cooperacion
Juridica Internacional)
Reconquista, #535
Montevideo, Uruguay
tel: (011) (598) (02) 46016, 403873
VENEZUELA
Ministeria de Justica
Dr. Harold Velazquez
Direccion General de Justica y Cultos
Direccion de Justica
Departmentado de Exhortos y Cartas Rogatorias
Piso 6, Av. Urdaneta, esquina de Platanal
Caracas 1010
tel: 506-15-11
MFA - Cancilleria
Dr. Hilda Martinez
Direccion de Servicio Consular Nacional
Departmentado de Exhortos y Cartas Rogatorias
Piso 5, esquina de Carmelitas
Torre, MRE
Caracas 1010
tel: 806-45-25
Selected Bibliography:
Federal Register 31132, Vol. 53, No. 159, Wednesday, August 17, 1988 announced entry into force of the Convention and address of U.S. Central Authority.
Federal Register, Vol. 53, No. 85, Tuesday, May 3, 1988, April 28, 1988, Executive Order 12638, Delegation of Functions Relating to the Implementation of the Convention and Additional Protocol to the United States Department of Justice.
Born, International Litigation, The International Lawyer''s Deskbook, Section of International Law and Practice, American Bar Association, p. 281 (1996).
Born & Westin, International Civil Litigation in United States Courts, (1989), p. 136-137; Appendix E, p. 670-684.
Carl, Service of Judicial Documents in Latin America, Vol. 53, No. 3, Denver Law Journal 455-475 (1976).
Epstein, International Litigation: A Guide to Jurisdiction, Practice and Strategy, Prentice Hall Law & Business, Sec. 4.05, p. 4-24 - 4-28 (1994 supp.).
Kearney, Developments in Private International Law, 81 Am. J. Int''l. L. 724, 737 (1987).
Low, International Judicial Assistance Among the American States: Inter-American Conventions, 18 Int''l Law. 705 (1984).
McDowell, Digest of United States Practice in International Law, Department of State, Office of the Legal Adviser, 1975, 893 (1975).
Nash, Digest, United States Practice in International Law, Department of State, Office of the Legal Adviser, 1979, 1868-1882 (1979).
Nash, Cumulative Digest of United States Practice in International Law, Department of State, Office of the Legal Adviser, 1981-1988, p. 1441, 1555-1564 (1994).
Ristau & Laguna, The Inter-American Letters Rogatory Convention, Arizona J. of Int''l. & Comp. L. 124, 138 (1985).
Ristau, International Judicial Assistance (Civil and Commercial), International Law Institute, Vol. 1, Sec. 7-1-5, p. 257-274.16 (Supp. 1995).
Additional Information: The Office of American Citizens Services has available general information flyers on international judicial assistance. These topics include country-specific information about service of process and obtaining evidence abroad.
|
Using the Internet: Many of our judicial assistance flyers are available on the Internet via the Department of State, Bureau of Consular Affairs home page . See also, the Department of State, Office of the Legal Adviser for Private International Law home page for information regarding the work of the OAS at Private International Law Unification. See also the home pages for many of our embassies. As noted above, the text of the Convention and updated information concerning countries which have acceded to the Convention can be found in the Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory, Law Digest Volume .
Treaty Databases on the Internet:
United States Department of State, Office of the Legal Adviser, Treaty Affairs, List of Treaties and Other International Agreements of the United States In Force:
United Nations (UN): Databases/Treaties
Council of Europe (COE): under Texts/TreatiesQuestions: Additional questions regarding the operation of the Inter-American Service Convention should be addressed to the U.S. Central Authority, the Office of International Judicial Assistance, Civil Division, Department of Justice, tel: (202) 307-0983. General questions may also be addressed to the Inter-American Services Division of the Office of American Citizens Services at (202) 647-5118 or 202-647-5226.
Return to Judicial Assistance Page
