- You are here:
- Home
- Court Decisions
- FRANCE 63 A
FRANCE 63 A
Cour d’Appel, Paris, Pole 1, Chamber 1, 21 May 2019, no. 17/19850
(Egyptian General Petroleum Corporation – EGPC v. National Gas Company – NATGAS)
FRANCE 63 A
The Court of Appeal granted exequatur of a CRCICA award rendered in Cairo, holding that there was a valid arbitation agreement between the parties. The Court considered that the Egyptian law requirement that a public entity obtain a ministerial authorization to conclude a contract providing for arbitration was irrelevant to the determination by a French court of whether an arbitration clause was valid. The Court also found that the defendant had been granted sufficient time to examine certain accounts submitted in the file. See also the decision of the French Supreme Court denying the appeal from this decision (FRANCE 63 B).
Invalidity of the arbitration agreement: The court discusses other cases of invalidity of the arbitration agreement, including that there was no agreement at all or that the party was not a signatory thereto, that the incorrect arbitral institution was chosen, etc.
Due process: The court discusses various irregularities affecting due process, including letters not sent, names of arbitrators or experts not communicated, language of proceedings and communications, etc.
Award not binding, suspended or set aside: The court discusses the difference between the exclusive jurisdiction to set aside an award (primary jurisdiction), which belongs to the courts of the country of origin of the award, and the jurisdiction of all other courts to recognize and enforce the award (secondary jurisdiction); issues relating to the determination of the “competent authority”; and whether an award that has been set aside in the country of origin can be enforced in another State under the Convention.
More-favorable right provision: The court discusses examples of domestic laws of countries where enforcement of foreign awards is more favorable.