TNAG-1580-FCO40-2154-Extension-to-Hong-Kong-of-European-Community--European-Free-1987 — Page 81

2

EEC Group Meeting 2 June

confined so as to benefit only physical and not legal persons and to ensure that the EEC countries were not obliged to enforce judgments which Switzerland itself would not enforce. The text would only permit Switzerland not to enforce certain judgments in circumstances where this was contrary to Article 59 of the Swiss constitution. It would not prevent Member States from asserting jurisdiction themselves under Article 5 (1).

-

but the

4. It was generally agreed that it would be premature to submit

this document to the Swiss side - at least formally possibility could be raised orally.

Article 16

G

tenancies

5.

Spain and Portugal were not yet ready to indicate their

final position on an exception to the normal rule of Article 16

in relation to short term tenancies. They could not yet agree to Jenard's compromise proposal for a system as presently operated

under Article 15 of the 1968 Convention.

Article 64 (3)

declarations of extension

6. The United Kingdom indicated that this matter was still under consideration. The UK was not in favour of giving other countries a right of veto in respect of such territorial

extensions. Furthermore such a veto would give rise to technical problems where the territorial extension was accepted by some Contracting States but not by others. It was still being

considered whether the UK would wish to extend the Parallel

Convention to territories outside Europe. Denmark said that it

would wish to extend the Parallel Convention to the Faeroes and

Greenland and was opposed to giving Third Countries a right of

veto over such a declaration of extension. Spain indicated that it intended to apply the Parallel Convention to the "whole of Spanish territory" and asked what the UK position was in respect