The court decisions available on this website interpret and apply the New York Convention. These court decisions are published in the Yearbook Commercial Arbitration since its Volume I (1976).
For instructions on how to search for court decisions per topic and per country in this website, please refer to our helpful access guide here.
Philippines No. 2020-1. Mabuhay Holdings Corporation (Philippines) v. Sembcorp Logistics Limited (Singapore), Supreme Court of the Republic of the Philippines, First Division, G.R. No. 212734, 5 December 2018
Supreme Court of the Republic of the Philippines,
First Division, 5 December 2018
Mabuhay Holdings Corporation v. Sembcorp Logistics Limited
The court discusses general questions relating to the interpretation of the Convention as an international treaty, also in respect of the methods of interpretation laid down in the 1969 Vienna Convention; the relationship between the New York Convention and the UNCITRAL Model Law and Recommendation 2006.
The court discusses the principle that the merits of the award may not be reviewed and that the court may only carry out a limited review of the award to ascertain grounds for refusal.
Public policy: The court discusses the meaning of (international as compared to domestic) public policy, generally defined as the basic notions of morality and justice of the enforcement State.
Public policy: The court discusses the effect of other alleged violations of public policy on the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, such as contradictory reasons, manifest disregard of the law (US), etc.
Philippines 8. Tuna Processing, Inc. v. Philippine Kingford, Inc., Supreme Court of the Republic of the Philippines, Second Division, G.R. 185582, 29 February 2012
The court discusses the principle that the procedure for the enforcement of awards under the Convention is governed by the lex fori, as well as procedural issues (such as the competent enforcement court) not falling under the specific cases of ¶¶ 302-307.
The court discusses questions relating to the general approach taken by the Convention to the grounds for refusal of recognition and enforcement, including its pro-enforcement bias, as well as the system of the Convention, under which recognition and enforcement may only be denied on seven listed grounds and the petitioner has only the obligations set out in Art. IV.
Philippines 7. Cargill Philippines, Inc. v. San Fernando Regala Trading, Inc., Supreme Court of the Republic of the Philippines, Second Division, G.R. 175404, 31 January 2011
The court discusses the principle of competence-competence, including whether the parties “intended to have arbitrability decided by an arbitrator”, and the separability of the arbitration agreement from the main contract.
Philippines 5. Supreme Court of the Republic of the Philippines, Second Division, 7 January 2008
The court discusses how to interpret the Convention’s requirement that the agreement is not null and void etc., as well as specific cases of invalidity: e.g., lack of consent (misrepresentation, duress, or fraud), vague wording of the arbitral clause; other terms of the contract contradict the intention to arbitrate, etc.
Related court proceedings: The court discusses whether provisional measures, such as the pre-award attachment of assets, are compatible with the Convention.
Philippines 4. Supreme Court of the Republic of the Philippines, Special Second Division, 22 January 2007
The court discusses the principle of competence-competence, including whether the parties “intended to have arbitrability decided by an arbitrator”, and the separability of the arbitration agreement from the main contract.
Philippines 2. Court of Appeals, Manila, Special Former Fourth Division, 29 November 2006
The court discusses whether the Convention applies to domestic arbitration and to proceedings for the setting aside of domestic awards.
The court discusses the principle that the procedure for the enforcement of awards under the Convention is governed by the lex fori, as well as procedural issues (such as the competent enforcement court) not falling under the specific cases of ¶¶ 302-307.
The court discusses the conditions under which a party may be estopped from raising a ground for refusal of enforcement under the Convention or has waived the right to raise it.
Public policy: The court discusses the effect of other alleged violations of public policy on the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, such as contradictory reasons, manifest disregard of the law (US), etc.
Philippines 3. Court of Appeals, Manila, Seventh Division, 31 July 2006
The court discusses the principle of competence-competence, including whether the parties “intended to have arbitrability decided by an arbitrator”, and the separability of the arbitration agreement from the main contract.
Philippines 6. Court of Appeals, Manila, Thirteenth Division, 5 July 2006
The court discusses the determination and relevance of the place where the award was made (in a foreign State or another contracting State.
The court discusses the impact of the nationality of the parties on the application of the Convention.
Philippines 1. Supreme Court of the Republic of the Philippines, Second Division, 26 April 1990
The court discusses issues specific to bills of lading and charterparties, such as whether the subsequent holder of the bill of lading is bound by the arbitration agreement therein and whether the arbitration clause in the charterparty is incorporated into the bill of lading.
The court discusses the meaning and effect of the referral of the resolution of disputes to arbitration, including: who can ask for referral and when, whether a party has waived its right to request arbitration, the defense that there was no contract at all; whether there was a condition precedent to the commencement of arbitration (e.g. mediation), stay of proceedings v. compelling arbitration, and national procedural specificities such as remand and removal (US), effect of class action. etc.