- You are here:
- Home
- Court Decisions
- SPAIN 2026-2
SPAIN 2026-2
Tribunal Superior de Justicia , Madrid, Civil and Penal Chamber, First Section, 18 June 2024, Case No. 38/2024, Decision No. 11/2024
(XO Shipping, A/S. v. Cemco Cement Trading, S.L.)
... Read more
Tribunal Superior de Justicia , Madrid, Civil and Penal Chamber, First Section, 18 June 2024, Case No. 38/2024, Decision No. 11/2024
(XO Shipping, A/S. v. Cemco Cement Trading, S.L.)
SPAIN 2026-2
The Superior Court of Justice granted leave to enforce three awards rendered in London in a dispute arising from a voyage charterparty. The Court found that the conditions for seeking exequatur were met, and that the dispute related to a commercial charterparty and was therefore arbitrable. The respondent’s claim that there was no arbitration agreement between the parties failed, as the Court found that the charterparty, which contained a clear arbitration clause, had been concluded through an intermediary acting on the respondent’s instructions.
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.
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.
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 cases in which the subject matter of the award was not arbitrable in the enforcement State on public policy grounds.
Public policy: The court discusses alleged violations of a fundamental rule of due process in the arbitration on the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, including the failure to communicate the names of the arbitrators, the failure to send copies of reports or letters filed in the arbitration, etc.