Generally speaking, the other party may, if a party has breached a transaction contract: transaction agreements are contracts by which the parties agree to be bound by specific commitments or abstain from certain acts in exchange for the settlement of the parties` claims. In the context of employment, a comparison contract may require, for example. B, that an employer provide compensatory compensation and the continuation of benefits to the employee, and vice versa, require that the worker not cooperate or ask with the employer`s clients and employees. The judges of Mesa RHF Partners made it clear that there could be another remedy to enforce the transaction agreement in the form of a new action for breach of the agreement, but the apparent and fairly long time of such an action for a positive conclusion requires this option to be a bad second choice. If one takes the time to secure the jurisdiction when the parties sign the transaction contract, it guarantees a smooth process that the case can force if the case requires it. A federal court may, of course, remain competent for the application of a transaction agreement according to the doctrine of ancillary jurisdiction12, 13 A federal court may, therefore: 1) retain jurisdiction to the extent that the parties require jurisdiction, 2) fully oppose the exercise of the ancillary jurisdiction or 3) change the scope of the subsidiary liability sought by the parties.13 Assuming that the Tribunal decides to retain jurisdiction for the performance of the settlement contract, it must decide how long it will last. Unless the order is otherwise, the maintenance of the jurisdiction of a federal court for the performance of a judgment is considered exclusive to the state courts: ” (I) t would be useless for the Amtsgericht to interpret and apply its own judgment. but a state court, which wrote what the Federal Court of Justice said in the judgment. 39 Comparison of parties may be included in a restraining order requiring continued compliance by the parties. This is called an approval order. “A decree of approval is nothing more than a transaction that contains an injunction.” 3 This approach may attract some criticism as an attempt to legitimized an otherwise “unworkable” IMSA, but it meets the technical requirements of the New York Convention.
The court is entitled to: As a result, labour practitioners should consider including a specific language in the transaction contract and/or termination order, specifying the jurisdiction of the appelntial court that has committed an alleged breach of the terms of the transaction contract, taking into account the scope and duration of that power. In the case of proper implementation, the parties can avoid the costs, time and resources associated with the introduction of a new measure to enforce the terms of the transaction agreement. A transaction agreement authorizing the parties to apply for enforcement in court and an ordered dismissal “in accordance” with this settlement agreement sufficiently demonstrate the Tribunal`s intention to retain jurisdiction.34 A transaction agreement generally describes the amount to be paid, by whom and to whom. The recital indicates that the payment is made in exchange for an unblocking and a request to dismiss and quash all claims.