|
|
| Weddings in the Pacific |
| Apostille Convention |
| The International Convention abolishing the requirement of legalisation for foreign public documents (The Hague, 5 October 1961, Netherlands Treaty Series 1963, 28) (frequently referred to in Dutch as the Apostilleverdrag) was drawn up by the Hague Conference for Private International Law during its ninth session in 1960. | ![]() |
|
| Content of this document | ||
Editor: Willem van Arnhem, former head of the Private International Law Section, Ministry of Foreign Affairs 1 Introductory remarks |
||
|
According to the explanatory memorandum to the Kingdom Act of 10 March 1965, its aim was, in the context of international legal affairs between the countries signatory to the Convention, to abolish the legalisation, as required by various countries, of the public documents to which the Convention refers, and to replace it with a simple formality. Under article 2 of the Convention, the contracting States are required to exempt from legalisation public documents which have to be produced in their territory. For the purposes of the Convention, legalisation means only the formality by which diplomatic or consular agents certify the authenticity of the signature on the document. This limited definition of the term legalisation has more far-reaching implications than one might think at first sight. In the normal course of affairs, only signatures known to the consulate will be legalised. Generally speaking, the signatures are those of competent officials of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the country of origin. It is usually necessary for a document to be legalised by a number of bodies, resulting in a series (either long or short) of signatures, so that the consul can legalise a signature he is familiar with. With the abolition of legalisation by the consular agent, the series of previous legalisations is no longer necessary either. The simple formality which has replaced legalisation is the addition of a certificate, or 'apostille'. Many local authorities believe that documents originating from countries which are signatories to the Convention do not require legalisation. This is incorrect. Such documents need not undergo the lengthy legalisation process but they must always have an apostille appended. 2 The apostille |
||
| The
apostille referred to in article 3 of the Convention is placed on the
document itself or on what is known as the 'allonge' (annexed to the
document for this purpose). It is in the form of a square whose sides are
at least 9 cm long and the title ("Apostille (Convention de La Haye
du 5 octobre 1961)") must be in French. The rest of the information
may be in the official language of the issuing authority.
Specimen apostille
If the Convention does apply to a document, it is important to check whether the apostille has been appended. If properly completed, the apostille confirms the authenticity of the signature, the capacity in which the signatory has acted and, where necessary, the identity of the stamp or seal on the document. If there are doubts about the origin of a document, an interested party may contact the authority responsible for appending the apostille. 3 What is a public document? |
||
| What
needs to be borne in mind when accepting a document from a country which
is a signatory to the Convention? First of all, whether it is indeed a
public document within the meaning of the Convention. There is no general
definition of this term in the Convention, but since the contracting
States wished to facilitate the abolition of legalisation, the term must
be given as broad an interpretation as possible.
In view of this, all documents which are not private instruments are deemed to be public documents. The Convention specifies the following:
The explanatory memorandum assumes that the legalisation of a private instrument by a notary is deemed to be an official certificate, so that the document in question is covered by the Convention and may have an apostille appended. The Convention does not apply to:
|
||
| An
apostille is issued by a designated central authority. In the Netherlands
this is the registrar at the district court. In other countries it is
often the Minister of Justice or of Foreign Affairs.
An overview of all the designated authorities in the various countries is to be found at the website of the Hague Conference on International Private Law: (www.hcch.net), under Conventions, then No. 12 Convention of 5 October 1961 abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public Documents. If there are doubts about the origin of a document, an interested party may contact the authority responsible for appending the apostille. Article 7 of the Convention obliges the competent authorities to keep a register or card index in which the apostilles issued are recorded. Such as system must specify:
|
||
| The Convention applies to the whole of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, i.e. to the Netherlands in Europe and to the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba. However, it would be wrong to think that documents originating from the Netherlands Antilles or Aruba which have to be produced in the Netherlands must have an apostille appended. There is no legalisation requirement in operation between the different parts of the Kingdom. | ||
| The
list below has been updated to 3 October 2001.
The date given after a countrys name is the date on which the Convention entered into force in that country. |
||
|
Andorra |
31.12.96 |
Germany |
13.02.66 |
Norway |
29.07.83 |
|
Antigua & Barbuda |
01.11.81 |
Greece |
18.05.85 |
Panama |
04.08.91 |
|
Argentina |
18.02.88 |
Hungary |
18.01.73 |
Portugal |
04.02.69 |
|
Armenia |
14.08.94 |
Hong Kong |
24.01.65 |
Romania |
16.03.01 |
|
Aruba |
30.04.67 |
Ireland |
09.03.99 |
Russian Federation |
31.05.92 |
|
Australia |
16.03.95 |
Israel |
14.08.78 |
St. Kitts & Nevis |
14.12.94 |
|
Austria |
13.01.68 |
Italy |
11.02.78 |
Samoa |
13.09.99 |
|
Bahamas |
10.07.73 |
Japan |
27.07.70 |
San Marino |
13.02.95 |
|
Barbados |
30.11.66 |
Kazakhstan |
30.01.01 |
Seychelles |
31.03.79 |
|
Belorussia (White Russia) |
31.05.92 |
Latvia |
30.01.96 |
Slovenia |
08.10.91 |
|
Belgium |
09.02.76 |
Lesotho |
04.10.66 |
South Africa |
30.04.95 |
|
Belize |
11.04.93 |
Liberia |
08.02.96 |
Spain |
25.09.78 |
|
Bosnia-Herz. |
06.03.92 |
Liechtenstein |
19.07.72 |
Surinam |
25.11.75 |
|
Botswana |
30.09.66 |
Lithuania |
19.07.97 |
Swaziland |
06.09.68 |
|
Brunei Darus. |
03.12.87 |
Luxembourg |
03.06.79 |
Sweden |
01.05.99 |
|
Bulgaria |
29.04.01 |
Macedonia |
17.09.91 |
Switzerland |
11.03.73 |
|
Colombia |
30.01.01 |
Malawi |
01.12.67 |
Tonga |
04.06.70 |
|
Croatia |
08.10.91 |
Malta |
02.03.68 |
Trinidad & Tobago |
14.07.00 |
|
Cyprus |
30.04.73 |
Marshall Isl. |
14.08.92 |
Turkey |
29.09.85 |
|
Czech Rep. |
16.03.99 |
Mauritius |
12.03.68 |
United Kingdom |
24.01.65 |
|
El Salvador |
31.05.96 |
Mexico |
14.08.95 |
United States |
15.10.81 |
|
Estonia |
30.09.01 |
Namibia |
30.01.01 |
Venezuela |
16.03.99 |
|
Fiji |
10.10.70 |
Netherlands |
08.10.65 |
Yugoslavia (Fed. Rep.) |
11.04.92 |
|
Finland |
26.08.85 |
Netherlands Antilles |
30.04.67 |
||
|
France |
24.01.65 |
Niue |
02.03.99 |
|
|