The New Moroccan Framework on International Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgment Enforcement – A Preliminary Critical Assessment

Key Takeaways

• New Moroccan Code of Civil Procedure effective Aug 24, 2026.
• Articles 72‑75 codify international jurisdiction, including party‑autonomy rule.
• Exequatur required for enforcing foreign judgments; reciprocity now mandatory.
• Special jurisdiction applies to foreign defendants lacking Moroccan domicile.
• Critics say rules lag behind modern private international law standards.

Pulse Analysis

Morocco’s adoption of a new Code of Civil Procedure marks a significant step in its effort to harmonize domestic litigation with international norms. The legislation, which follows years of drafting and consultation, reflects the kingdom’s growing involvement with the Hague Conference on Private International Law, highlighted by the recent establishment of the HCCH Regional Office for Africa in Rabat. By codifying international jurisdiction in Articles 72‑75, the Code provides clearer pathways for foreign defendants and Moroccan plaintiffs, while introducing party‑autonomy as a standalone ground for jurisdiction, a move that aligns with global trends toward contractual choice of court.

The jurisdictional framework distinguishes between general, special, and consent‑based bases, extending Moroccan court authority to cases involving assets, torts, intellectual property, and maintenance obligations within its borders. Notably, the ex officio rule requiring courts to decline jurisdiction when a defendant fails to appear aims to curb forum shopping and ensure procedural fairness. On the enforcement side, the new provisions mandate a prior exequatur declaration and embed a reciprocity requirement, signaling a more cautious approach to recognizing foreign judgments. These mechanisms are designed to protect public policy and ensure due process, yet they also add procedural layers that could delay cross‑border recovery.

Despite these advances, scholars argue that the Code retains an outdated private international law model, lacking distinctions between exclusive and concurrent jurisdiction and omitting enhanced protections for weaker parties. The reciprocity clause, in particular, may deter jurisdictions that do not impose similar conditions, potentially limiting the flow of Moroccan judgments abroad. For multinational corporations and investors, the reforms present both opportunities for greater legal certainty and challenges stemming from ambiguous provisions. Ongoing dialogue among legislators, practitioners, and international bodies will be crucial to refine the Code and fully integrate Morocco into the global dispute‑resolution ecosystem.