Court Decisions

The court decisions available on this website interpret and apply the New York Convention. These court decisions are in most cases published in the Yearbook Commercial Arbitration since its Volume I (1976). 

Search options:

Court Decisions Search Engine

The court decisions available on this website interpret and apply the New York Convention.

  1. Most decisions are reported in the Yearbook Commercial Arbitration, published by ICCA since 1976, and are numbered as in the Yearbook (e.g., US no. 954).

  2. Other decisions are indicated by country, date, and a short name (e.g., UK 18 June 2020 Alexander Brothers).

Court decisions can be searched by country and by topic.

Court Decisions

Search Court Decisions

  • Excerpt Topics
    ISRAEL 13

    The Supreme Court addressed the issue of what is the proper method for enforcing foreign arbitral awards which have been certified by a competent court in the seat of the arbitration, i.e., whether by seeking recognition and enforcement of the award or by seeking recognition and enforcement of the foreign judgment certifying the award. It clarified that the proper process is provided under section 29a of the Israeli Arbitration Law, 5728-1968 and in the New York Convention; it is only in rare and exceptional cases that the recognition and enforcement of a foreign award may be pursued by seeking enforcement of the foreign judgment certifying it, through the procedure set out in the Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Law, 5718-1958.

    The Supreme Court also explained the phrase “becomes binding” in Article V(1)(e) of the New York Convention means that it is no longer possible to file an appeal from the award in the arbitration proceeding, as distinct from an appeal before a court. The Court further confirmed that (i) once the arbitral award is set aside at the seat of the arbitration, it should not be recognized and enforced under the New York Convention, except in exceptional cases (for example, the decision to set it aside was made by a judicial forum that is not autonomous and independent); and (ii) certification of the arbitral award in the seat of the arbitration does not automatically lead to recognition and enforcement by virtue of the New York Convention. However, rejection of claims pertaining to the validity of the arbitral award in a motion to certify or set it aside could give rise to cause of action estoppel that bars identical claims from being raised in the opposition to enforcement and certification of the arbitral award in Israel.

    Supreme Court of Israel, 21 April 2021

    (Luminati Networks Ltd. V. B.I. Science Ltd.)

    301

    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.

    Procedure for enforcement in general
    500A Residual power to enforce notwithstanding existence of ground for refusal
    501

    The court discusses questions relating to the general approach taken by the Convention to the grounds for refusal of recognition and enforcement, including its pro-enforcement bias, as well as the system of the Convention, under which recognition and enforcement may only be denied on seven listed grounds and the petitioner has only the obligations set out in Art. IV.

    Grounds are exhaustive
    514 Ground e: Award not binding, suspended or set aside - "Binding"
    515

    Award not binding, suspended or set aside: The court discusses the conditions under which an award that has merged into a court judgment in the country of origin can still be enforced as an award under the Convention, and whether a decision granting recognition under the Convention can be enforced as a foreign court judgment in a third country.

    Merger of award into judgment
    516

    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.

    "Set aside"
    701

    More-favorable right provision: The court discusses issues relating to the more-favorable right provision in general, including who may invoke it, and when.

    More-favourable-right provision in general
  • Excerpt Topics
    ISRAEL 12

    Israel 12. Siemens AG v. Israeli Electric Cooperation Ltd, Supreme Court of Israel, Case No. no. 3331/14, 13 August 2014

    217

    The court discusses the meaning and effect of the referral of the resolution of disputes to arbitration, including: who can ask for referral and when, whether a party has waived its right to request arbitration, the defense that there was no contract at all; whether there was a condition precedent to the commencement of arbitration (e.g. mediation), stay of proceedings v. compelling arbitration, and national procedural specificities such as remand and removal (US), effect of class action. etc.

    Referral to arbitration in general
    220

    The court discusses how to interpret the Convention’s requirement that the agreement is not null and void etc., as well as specific cases of invalidity: e.g., lack of consent (misrepresentation, duress, or fraud), vague wording of the arbitral clause; other terms of the contract contradict the intention to arbitrate, etc.

    "Null and void", etc.
    ISRAEL 11

    Israel 11. District Court, Tel-Aviv-Yafo, 15 June 2014

    214-216 Field of application
    217

    The court discusses the meaning and effect of the referral of the resolution of disputes to arbitration, including: who can ask for referral and when, whether a party has waived its right to request arbitration, the defense that there was no contract at all; whether there was a condition precedent to the commencement of arbitration (e.g. mediation), stay of proceedings v. compelling arbitration, and national procedural specificities such as remand and removal (US), effect of class action. etc.

    Referral to arbitration in general
    226

    Multi-party disputes: The court discusses under which conditions non-signatories are covered by an arbitration agreement entered into by another party.

    Third parties (see also Art. I sub F "problems concerning the identity of the respondent", ¶106)
    ISRAEL 10 B

    See also District Court, Tel Aviv, 17 February 2013 (Darie Engineering Ltd v. Alstom International SAS, et al.) ISRAEL 10 A

    Supreme Court, 13 February 2014

    (Darie Engineering Ltd v. Alstom International SAS, et al.)

    203-204 Formal validity, uniform law and municipal law
  • Excerpt Topics
    ISRAEL 9

    Israel 9. Central Magistrate Court of Israel, Netanya, 4 March 2013

    220

    The court discusses how to interpret the Convention’s requirement that the agreement is not null and void etc., as well as specific cases of invalidity: e.g., lack of consent (misrepresentation, duress, or fraud), vague wording of the arbitral clause; other terms of the contract contradict the intention to arbitrate, etc.

    "Null and void", etc.
    ISRAEL 10 A

    See also Supreme Court, 13 February 2014 (Darie Engineering Ltd v. Alstom International SAS, et al.) ISRAEL 10 B

    District Court, Tel Aviv, 17 February 2013 

    (Darie Engineering Ltd v. Alstom International SAS, et al.)

    203-204 Formal validity, uniform law and municipal law
  • Excerpt Topics
    ISRAEL 8

    Israel 8. Supreme Court of Israel, 11 October 2012

    217

    The court discusses the meaning and effect of the referral of the resolution of disputes to arbitration, including: who can ask for referral and when, whether a party has waived its right to request arbitration, the defense that there was no contract at all; whether there was a condition precedent to the commencement of arbitration (e.g. mediation), stay of proceedings v. compelling arbitration, and national procedural specificities such as remand and removal (US), effect of class action. etc.

    Referral to arbitration in general
    ISRAEL 7

    Israel 7. Supreme Court of Israel, 27 June 2012

    217

    The court discusses the meaning and effect of the referral of the resolution of disputes to arbitration, including: who can ask for referral and when, whether a party has waived its right to request arbitration, the defense that there was no contract at all; whether there was a condition precedent to the commencement of arbitration (e.g. mediation), stay of proceedings v. compelling arbitration, and national procedural specificities such as remand and removal (US), effect of class action. etc.

    Referral to arbitration in general
    226

    Multi-party disputes: The court discusses under which conditions non-signatories are covered by an arbitration agreement entered into by another party.

    Third parties (see also Art. I sub F "problems concerning the identity of the respondent", ¶106)
  • Excerpt Topics
    ISRAEL 6

    Israel 6. Central Magistrate Court of Israel, 15 April 2010

    513 Ground d: Irregularity in the composition of the arbitral tribunal or arbitral procedure
    518

    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.

    Paragraph 2 - Distinction domestic-international public policy
    521

    Public policy: The court discusses the consequences of the apparent or actual bias of an arbitrator on the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award.

    Lack of impartiality of arbitrator
    524

    Public policy: The court discusses the effect of other alleged violations of public policy on the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, such as contradictory reasons, manifest disregard of the law (US), etc.

    Other cases
    ISRAEL 5

    Israel 5. Supreme Court of Israel, 12 April 2010

    201

    The court discusses whether the dispute falls within the wording of the arbitration agreement; and whether claims in tort fall within the scope of the agreement.

    Scope of arbitration agreement
    217

    The court discusses the meaning and effect of the referral of the resolution of disputes to arbitration, including: who can ask for referral and when, whether a party has waived its right to request arbitration, the defense that there was no contract at all; whether there was a condition precedent to the commencement of arbitration (e.g. mediation), stay of proceedings v. compelling arbitration, and national procedural specificities such as remand and removal (US), effect of class action. etc.

    Referral to arbitration in general
    222

    The court discusses the principle of competence-competence, including whether the parties “intended to have arbitrability decided by an arbitrator”, and the separability of the arbitration agreement from the main contract.

    Arbitrator's competence and separability of the arbitration clause
    ISRAEL 4

    Israel 4. Supreme Court of Israel, 24 January 2010

    217

    The court discusses the meaning and effect of the referral of the resolution of disputes to arbitration, including: who can ask for referral and when, whether a party has waived its right to request arbitration, the defense that there was no contract at all; whether there was a condition precedent to the commencement of arbitration (e.g. mediation), stay of proceedings v. compelling arbitration, and national procedural specificities such as remand and removal (US), effect of class action. etc.

    Referral to arbitration in general
    218

    The court discusses whether referral of the resolution of disputes to arbitration is mandatory under the Convention and whether mandatory referral is an internationally uniform rule which supersedes municipal law.

    Referral is mandatory
  • Excerpt Topics
    ISRAEL 3

    Israel 3. District Court, Jerusalem, 13 January 2009

    101

    The court discusses the determination and relevance of the place where the award was made (in a foreign State or another contracting State.

    Award made in the territory of another (Contracting) State (paragraphs 1 and 3 - first or "reciprocity" reservation)
    501

    The court discusses questions relating to the general approach taken by the Convention to the grounds for refusal of recognition and enforcement, including its pro-enforcement bias, as well as the system of the Convention, under which recognition and enforcement may only be denied on seven listed grounds and the petitioner has only the obligations set out in Art. IV.

    Grounds are exhaustive
    503

    The court discusses the burden of proof of the grounds for refusing enforcement under the Convention.

    Burden of proof on respondent
    524

    Public policy: The court discusses the effect of other alleged violations of public policy on the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, such as contradictory reasons, manifest disregard of the law (US), etc.

    Other cases
  • Excerpt Topics
    ISRAEL 2

    Israel 2. Supreme Court of Israel, 7 September 2005

    217

    The court discusses the meaning and effect of the referral of the resolution of disputes to arbitration, including: who can ask for referral and when, whether a party has waived its right to request arbitration, the defense that there was no contract at all; whether there was a condition precedent to the commencement of arbitration (e.g. mediation), stay of proceedings v. compelling arbitration, and national procedural specificities such as remand and removal (US), effect of class action. etc.

    Referral to arbitration in general
  • Excerpt Topics
    ISRAEL 1

    Israel 1. District Court, Jerusalem, 23 November 2004

    101

    The court discusses the determination and relevance of the place where the award was made (in a foreign State or another contracting State.

    Award made in the territory of another (Contracting) State (paragraphs 1 and 3 - first or "reciprocity" reservation)
    301

    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.

    Procedure for enforcement in general
    503

    The court discusses the burden of proof of the grounds for refusing enforcement under the Convention.

    Burden of proof on respondent
    514 Ground e: Award not binding, suspended or set aside - "Binding"
    518

    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.

    Paragraph 2 - Distinction domestic-international public policy
    519

    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.

    Ground a: Arbitrability
    524

    Public policy: The court discusses the effect of other alleged violations of public policy on the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, such as contradictory reasons, manifest disregard of the law (US), etc.

    Other cases