The Court granted recognition and enforcement of a Ukrainian award, rejecting the contention of the respondent that it had not been properly served with the documents relating to the arbitration. The Court held that service by courier was in accordance with Ukrainian law, the law of the seat, and with the applicable arbitration rules of the International Commercial Arbitration Court at the Ukrainian Chamber of Commerce and Industry. As it appeared that representatives of the respondent had signed the courier’s receipt, it was irrelevant that there was a misspelt letter in the address on the first delivery with respect to the address indicated in the underlying contract. In CHINA 55, the Court reached the same conclusion  in a case in which the respondent had raised the same objections against a different Ukrainian petitioner.