- You are here:
- Home
- Court Decisions
- NETHERLANDS 2026-1
NETHERLANDS 2026-1
Gerechtshof, Amsterdam, 8 July 2025, Case No. 200.347.998
([appellant] in liquidation v. RTI Ltd. and United Company Rusal, International P.J.S.C.)
... Read more
Gerechtshof, Amsterdam, 8 July 2025, Case No. 200.347.998
([appellant] in liquidation v. RTI Ltd. and United Company Rusal, International P.J.S.C.)
NETHERLANDS 2026-1
The Court of Appeal granted the exequatur application filed by the petitioner (in fact, OWH SE) in respect of an LCIA award, holding that the petitioner had submitted the necessary documents under the New York Convention, and that there were no grounds for refusal. In particular, there was no indication that the subject matter of the award was not arbitrable under Dutch law or that enforcement would violate Dutch public policy, and it was established that no annulment action had been filed against the award within the applicable time limit. The respondent had not appeared and therefore had raised no grounds for refusal.
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 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 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 overall scheme and/or pro-enforcement bias of the Convention.