- You are here:
- Home
- Court Decisions
- BRAZIL 68
BRAZIL 68
Superior Tribunal de Justiça, 26 April 2024, HDE No. 6541-EX
(P E I G v. I I DE M I L)
... Read more
Superior Tribunal de Justiça, 26 April 2024, HDE No. 6541-EX
(P E I G v. I I DE M I L)
BRAZIL 68
Granting recognition of a German award, the Superior Court of Justice rejected all the objections raised by the defendant. The Court found in particular that, in the case at issue, examining the allegation of a violation of public policy violation would involve re-evaluating evidence and reviewing the merits of the arbitral decision, which fell outside the scope of the recognition proceedings. The Court applied the provisions of Brazilian law that mirror the provisions of the New York Convention. The Special Court of the Superior Court later dismissed the internal appeal filed against this decision in BRAZIL 72.
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 general conditions the Convention imposes on a petitioner for seeking recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award – namely, the submission of the original arbitration agreement or arbitral award or a certified copy thereof – and examines in general whether these conditions were complied in the case at issue.
The court discusses how to determine whether the document supplied is an award capable of being recognized and enforced, including whether the award is duly authenticated, and whether a copy is duly certified; whether a prior interim and/or partial award should be supplied together with the final award.
The court discusses issues relating to the requirement to supply the original arbitration agreement or a copy thereof to prove the prima facie validity of the arbitration agreement, as well as the application of more favorable municipal laws that do not provide for this requirement.
The court discusses issues relating to the manner of authentication and certification of the award and/or arbitration agreement.
The court discusses issues relating to the requirements of the translation (translation by sworn translator, translation of entire award etc.) and whether a translation is necessary.
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.