Facts
In 1995 and 1998, A. signed two promissory notes in favor of company X. SA, which became C. SA, for a total amount of 500,000 USD. Due to non-payment, the company filed a lawsuit against A. in 2011 before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. On June 7, 2004, the district judge found that A.'s debts to the company amounted to approximately 25,000 USD and had been repaid.
In May 2002, A. filed a personal bankruptcy petition before the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Columbia. On November 19, 2006, the bankruptcy judge ordered the company to withdraw certain proceedings initiated against A.
On August 18, 2008, A. filed a motion for sanctions against B. and C. SA, which was served on October 10, 2008 in accordance with the Hague Convention of 1965. On January 9, 2009, A. filed a motion with the bankruptcy judge to set a hearing on ex parte proof of damages, requesting a default judgment against the defendants and the scheduling of a hearing to prove the damages. On January 22, 2009, the bankruptcy judge found the defendants in default and scheduled the hearing for February 18, 2009.
By judgment of March 9, 2009, the bankruptcy judge ordered B. and C. SA to pay A. the sum of 1,417,454.43 USD in damages, as well as a penalty.
On November 16, 2012, A. filed a request with the President of the District Court of Lausanne for the enforcement of the U.S. judgment in Switzerland. On August 14, 2014, the President of the Civil Court rejected the request for exequatur. On November 4, 2014, the Civil Appeals Chamber of the Vaud Cantonal Court dismissed A.'s appeal.
Considerations
According to case law, the requirement of "proper service" under Article 27(2)(a) of the PILA aims to ensure that the defendant is informed of the proceedings initiated against them and has the opportunity to assert their defenses. In the case of a default judgment, Article 29(1)(c) of the PILA imposes stricter evidentiary requirements and shifts the burden of proof: the party…