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
    NETHERLANDS 80

    Rechtbank, The Hague, 18 July 2023, Case no. C/09/619394 / KG RK 21-1251

    (Devas Multimedia America Inc v. Antrix Corporation Limited et al.)

    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
    405

    The court discusses issues relating to the moment when the documents that are required for seeking recognition and enforcement must be supplied, and whether any defect can be cured later in the enforcement proceeding.

    "At the time of application"
    406

    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.

    Translation (paragraph 2)
    NETHERLANDS 79

    Gerechtshof, The Hague, 27 June 2023, Case no. 200.317.091/01

    ([Claimant 1] et al. v. Malaysia)

    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
    303

    The court discusses the conditions under which a party may be estopped from raising a ground for refusal of enforcement under the Convention or has waived the right to raise it.

    Estoppel/waiver
    401

    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.

    Conditions to be fulfilled by petitioner in general
    406

    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.

    Translation (paragraph 2)
    507

    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.

    Miscellaneous cases regarding the arbitration agreement
    513 Ground d: Irregularity in the composition of the arbitral tribunal or arbitral procedure
    517

    Award not binding, suspended or set aside: The court discusses the meaning of an award having been “suspended” in the country of origin, including when the award has been suspended by operation of law rather than by a court decision.

    "Suspended"
    704(C) Art. VII(1): European Union (Treaties and Legislation)
    NETHERLANDS 2024-1

    Rechtbank, Amsterdam, 15 March 2023, Case no. C/13/730214 / KG ZA 23-147 HH/MV

    (The Kingdom of Spain v. Blasket Renewable Investments LLC)

    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
    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"
    NETHERLANDS 78

    Rechtbank, Amsterdam, 9 January 2023, Case no. C/ 13/712678 / KG RK 22-65 MDvH/MV

    (Anatolie Stati et al. v. Republic of Kazakhstan)

    502

    The court discusses the principle that the merits of the award may not be reviewed and that the court may only carry out a limited review of the award to ascertain grounds for refusal.

    No re-examination of the merits of the arbitral award
    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
    NETHERLANDS 77

    Rechtbank, Rotterdam, 5 December 2022, Case no. C/10/640294 / KG RK 22-659

    (Crescent Gas Corporation Limited et al. v. National Iranian Oil Company)

    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
    303

    The court discusses the conditions under which a party may be estopped from raising a ground for refusal of enforcement under the Convention or has waived the right to raise it.

    Estoppel/waiver
    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
    502

    The court discusses the principle that the merits of the award may not be reviewed and that the court may only carry out a limited review of the award to ascertain grounds for refusal.

    No re-examination of the merits of the arbitral award
    512 Ground c: Excess by arbitrator of his authority - Excess of authority
    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
    601

    The court discusses the conditions for granting adjournment of a proceeding relating to the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, and the court’s discretionary power to do so, as well the determination of “suitable security” and the power to request it.

    Adjournment of decision on enforcement
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 76


    Deciding in the long-running Stati v. Kazakhstan case, which has been discussed in several jurisdictions, the Dutch Supreme Court found that the Amsterdam Court of Appeal erred in holding that it had jurisdiction over the application for exequatur of the SCC award between the parties. According to the transitional provisions of the 2015 Dutch arbitration law reform, the old law continues to apply to arbitrations commenced before the new law came into force on 1 January 2015, independent of the place of arbitration. This was the case here, and the competent judge was the President (voorzieningenrechter) of the Amsterdam Court of First Instance.

    Hoge Raad, 24 December 2021 
    (Republic of Kazakhstan v. Respondent 1, Respondent 2, ASCOM Group S.A., Terra Raf Trans Traiding 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
    NETHERLANDS 31 August 2021 Charitable Foundation Day One

    The Court of Appeal granted enforcement of a Swiss award in a short decision, finding that the applicant had supplied the necessary documents under the New York Convention and that no ground for refusal of enforcement had been invoked.

    Gerechtshof, Arnhem-Leeuwarden, 31 August 2021 
    (Charitable Foundation Day One v. Black Lion Holding B.V.)

    401

    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.

    Conditions to be fulfilled by petitioner in general
    500

    The court discusses the overall scheme and/or pro-enforcement bias of the Convention.

    Grounds for refusal of enforcement in general
    NETHERLANDS 20 July 2021 Concern Souzenergo

    The Amsterdam Court of Appeal granted enforcement of an award rendered by a tribunal of the ICAC Ukraine in a short decision. The applicant had supplied the necessary documents under the New York Convention, and since the defendant had not appeared in the enforcement proceeding, it had not raised any grounds for refusal of enforcement.

    Gerechtshof, Amsterdam, 20 July 2021 
    (Concern Souzenergo v. [X] Machines B.V.)
     

    401

    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.

    Conditions to be fulfilled by petitioner in general
    500

    The court discusses the overall scheme and/or pro-enforcement bias of the Convention.

    Grounds for refusal of enforcement in general
    NETHERLANDS 22 June 2021 Cavalo


    The Amsterdam Court of Appeal granted enforcement of an award rendered in London, noting succinctly that the applicant had supplied the documents required under the New York Convention, that the defendant had not appeared in the enforcement proceeding and therefore had not raised any grounds for refusal of enforcement, and there appeared to be no violation of Dutch public policy.

    Gerechtshof, Amsterdam, 22 June 2021 
    (Cavalo Chartering N.V. v. Phoenix Global DMCC)
     

    401

    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.

    Conditions to be fulfilled by petitioner in general
    500

    The court discusses the overall scheme and/or pro-enforcement bias of the Convention.

    Grounds for refusal of enforcement in general
    NETHERLANDS 15 June 2021 Diamond Building


    In a short decision, the Court of Appeal granted enforcement of a VIAC award rendered in Vienna. It found that the applicant had supplied the documents required under the New York Convention, and that no grounds for refusal appeared to exist.

    Gerechtshof, The Hague, 15 June 2021 
    (Construction Corporation "Diamond Building" LLC v. XSPlatforms B.V.)
     

    401

    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.

    Conditions to be fulfilled by petitioner in general
    500

    The court discusses the overall scheme and/or pro-enforcement bias of the Convention.

    Grounds for refusal of enforcement in general
    NETHERLANDS 75

    The Court of Appeal suspended the action for the enforcement of a French award, finding that an annulment action was pending in France based on the same grounds raised here in opposition to enforcement – that one of the arbitrators had not been impartial, and that the arbitral tribunal had exceeded its authority by awarding more than the petitum.

    Gerechtshof, Amsterdam, 23 February 2021 
    (CW Travel Holdings N.V. v. Seitur Agencia de Viajes y Turismo Cia. Ltda.)
     

    601

    The court discusses the conditions for granting adjournment of a proceeding relating to the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, and the court’s discretionary power to do so, as well the determination of “suitable security” and the power to request it.

    Adjournment of decision on enforcement
    NETHERLANDS 16 February 2021 CNPC Central Asia

    The Court of Appeal in The Hague granted enforcement of an ICC award rendered in Switzerland. It noted briefly that the applicant had supplied the necessary documents under the New York Convention, that the defendant had not appeared in the enforcement proceeding and therefore had not raised any grounds for refusal of enforcement, nor did any grounds for refusal appear to exist.

    Gerechtshof, The Hague, 16 February 2021 
    (CNPC Central Asia B.V. v. Kulob Petroleum Limited)
     

    401

    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.

    Conditions to be fulfilled by petitioner in general
    500

    The court discusses the overall scheme and/or pro-enforcement bias of the Convention.

    Grounds for refusal of enforcement in general
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 10 September 2020 [Limited] Limited

    In a very short decision, the Court of Appeal of Den Bosch granted recognition and enforcement of an award rendered in the United Kingdom. Although no original arbitration agreement was supplied to the Court, it appeared from an email of the defendant to the arbitrator that the defendant had been aware of the arbitration and accepted it.

    Gerechtshof, 's-Hertogenbosch, 10 September 2020
    ([Limited] Limited v. [BV] BV)

    403

    The court discusses issues relating to the requirement to supply the original arbitration agreement or a copy thereof to prove the prima facie validity of the arbitration agreement, as well as the application of more favorable municipal laws that do not provide for this requirement.

    Original or copy arbitration agreement
    NETHERLANDS 74

    The Rotterdam Court of First Instance held in a preliminary ruling on jurisdiction that under the applicable English law a ceded non-contractual obligation was not a "dispute arising out of the relationship into which parties entered or purported to enter".

    Rechtbank, Rotterdam, 9 September 2020, Case no. C/10/585135 / HA ZA 19-1017
    (Ediola Shipping Ltd. v. Cefetra B.V.)

    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
    NETHERLANDS 73

    The Rotterdam Court of First Instance found that the parties had not concluded a valid arbitration agreement compelling referral of their dispute to arbitration. The Court held that while an exchange of emails satisfies the requirement of Art. II(2) of the New York Convention, in the present case the exchange had not been between the two parties to the dispute, but rather between one of the parties and a third party.

    Rechtbank, Rotterdam, 1 July 2020, Case no. C/10/582568 / HA ZA 19-886
    (Universal Africa Lines Ltd v. Dumar Chartering B.V.)

    504 Paragraph 1 - Ground a: Invalidity of the arbitration agreement - Agreement referred to in Art. II
    507

    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.

    Miscellaneous cases regarding the arbitration agreement
    NETHERLANDS 26 March 2020 Seaquest

    The Court of Appeal granted recognition and enforcement of an award rendered by the Common Court of Justice and Arbitration of the Organization for the Harmonization in Africa of Business Law (OHADA). The Dutch Court held that the argument that the defendant had already paid under the award was not an objection falling within the scope of Art. V of the New York Convention.

    Gerechtshof, The Hague, 25 August 2020, Case no. 200.272.114

    (Seaquest-Infotel Inc. v. Sociéte Des Telecommunications du Mali S.A.)

    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
    NETHERLANDS 21 February 2020 Koksokhimtrans

    The Dutch Supreme Court granted the application to enforce English award, finding that the arbitration agreement had been duly concluded by email.

    Hoge Raad, 21 February 2020, Case no. 19/02778
    (Koksokhimtrans Ltd v. Cool Consultancy B.V.)

    504 Paragraph 1 - Ground a: Invalidity of the arbitration agreement - Agreement referred to in Art. II
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 72

    Netherlands No. 72. Leidos Incorporated v. The Hellenic Republic – Greece, Gerechtshof, The Hague, Case No. 200.248.376/01, 10 September 2019

    Gerechtshof, The Hague, 10 September 2019
    Leidos Incorporated v. The Hellenic Republic – Greece

    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
    406

    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.

    Translation (paragraph 2)
    523

    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.

    Irregularities in the arbitral procedure (see also Art. V(1)(b))
    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
    NETHERLANDS 70

    Netherlands 70. Russian Federation v. Everest Estate LLC et al., Gerechtshof, The Hague, Case No. 2019200.250.714-01, 11 June 2019

    517

    Award not binding, suspended or set aside: The court discusses the meaning of an award having been “suspended” in the country of origin, including when the award has been suspended by operation of law rather than by a court decision.

    "Suspended"
    601

    The court discusses the conditions for granting adjournment of a proceeding relating to the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, and the court’s discretionary power to do so, as well the determination of “suitable security” and the power to request it.

    Adjournment of decision on enforcement
    NETHERLANDS 71

    Netherlands No. 71. Former Employee v. Company 1, Gerechtshof, ’s Hertogenbosch, Case No. 200.247.117/01, 6 June 2019

    Gerechtshof, 's-Hertogenbosch, 6 June 2019
    Former Employee v. Company 1

    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
    504 Paragraph 1 - Ground a: Invalidity of the arbitration agreement - Agreement referred to in Art. II
    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"
    NETHERLANDS 69

    Netherlands 69. Russian claimant v. Defendant, Gerechtshof [Court of Appeal], ’s-Hertogenbosch, Case No. 200.238.505/01, 7 March 2019

    402

    The court discusses how to determine whether the document supplied is an award capable of being recognized and enforced, including whether the award is duly authenticated, and whether a copy is duly certified; whether a prior interim and/or partial award should be supplied together with the final award.

    Original or copy arbitral award
    403

    The court discusses issues relating to the requirement to supply the original arbitration agreement or a copy thereof to prove the prima facie validity of the arbitration agreement, as well as the application of more favorable municipal laws that do not provide for this requirement.

    Original or copy arbitration agreement
    NETHERLANDS 68

    Netherlands 68. GET Technologies Limited v. Bankswitch Ghana Limited et al., Gerechtshof, Amsterdam, Case Nos 200.219.215/01 and 200.219.267/01, 5 March 2019

    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
    NETHERLANDS ANTILLES 5

    Netherlands Antilles 5. Virginia Huntington Ingalls Incorporated v. Ministry of Defense of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Gerecht in Eerste Aanleg van Bonaire, Sint Eustatius en Saba, Case No. BON201800432, 30 January 2019

    105

    The court discusses issues relating to the quality of the parties, as physical or legal persons against whom enforcement of an arbitral award is sought, including the incapacity of a State to enter into an arbitration agreement, and questions relating to sovereign immunity. For the related defenses to enforcement, see Art. V(1)(a).

    "Persons, whether physical or legal" (paragraph 1) (including sovereign immunity)
    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
    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
    512 Ground c: Excess by arbitrator of his authority - Excess of authority
    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"
    517

    Award not binding, suspended or set aside: The court discusses the meaning of an award having been “suspended” in the country of origin, including when the award has been suspended by operation of law rather than by a court decision.

    "Suspended"
    NETHERLANDS 67

    Netherlands 67. X v. Y, Gerechtshof, Amsterdam, Case No. 200.234.175/01, 29 January 2019

    523

    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.

    Irregularities in the arbitral procedure (see also Art. V(1)(b))
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 66

    Netherlands 66. Ascom Group SA et al. v. Republic of Kazakhstan, Gerechtshof, Amsterdam, Case No. 200.224.067/01, 6 November 2018

    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
    511

    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.

    "Otherwise unable to present his case"
    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
    601

    The court discusses the conditions for granting adjournment of a proceeding relating to the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, and the court’s discretionary power to do so, as well the determination of “suitable security” and the power to request it.

    Adjournment of decision on enforcement
    NETHERLANDS 65

    Netherlands 65. Serena Equity Limited v. Fincantieri S.p.A., Gerechtshof, Amsterdam, Case No. 200.219.927/01, 9 October 2018

    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
    505 Incapacity of party
    512 Ground c: Excess by arbitrator of his authority - Excess of authority
    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
    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
    601

    The court discusses the conditions for granting adjournment of a proceeding relating to the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, and the court’s discretionary power to do so, as well the determination of “suitable security” and the power to request it.

    Adjournment of decision on enforcement
    NETHERLANDS 64

    Netherlands 64. Diag Human v. Czech Republic, Hoge Raad, Case No. 17/02024, 15 June 2018

    001

    The court discusses general questions relating to the interpretation of the Convention as an international treaty, also in respect of the methods of interpretation laid down in the 1969 Vienna Convention; the relationship between the New York Convention and the UNCITRAL Model Law and Recommendation 2006. 

    Interpretation of the Convention
    502

    The court discusses the principle that the merits of the award may not be reviewed and that the court may only carry out a limited review of the award to ascertain grounds for refusal.

    No re-examination of the merits of the arbitral award
    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"
    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
    NETHERLANDS 63

    Netherlands 63. Dunav Re A.D.O. Beograd v. Dutch Marine Insurance B.V., Gerechtshof, The Hague, Case No. 200.223.489/01, 17 April 2018

    402

    The court discusses how to determine whether the document supplied is an award capable of being recognized and enforced, including whether the award is duly authenticated, and whether a copy is duly certified; whether a prior interim and/or partial award should be supplied together with the final award.

    Original or copy arbitral award
    403

    The court discusses issues relating to the requirement to supply the original arbitration agreement or a copy thereof to prove the prima facie validity of the arbitration agreement, as well as the application of more favorable municipal laws that do not provide for this requirement.

    Original or copy arbitration agreement
    406

    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.

    Translation (paragraph 2)
    511

    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.

    "Otherwise unable to present his case"
    512 Ground c: Excess by arbitrator of his authority - Excess of authority
    523

    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.

    Irregularities in the arbitral procedure (see also Art. V(1)(b))
    601

    The court discusses the conditions for granting adjournment of a proceeding relating to the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, and the court’s discretionary power to do so, as well the determination of “suitable security” and the power to request it.

    Adjournment of decision on enforcement
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 62

    Netherlands 62. Not indicated v. OJSC Novolipetsky Metallurgichesky Kombinat, Hoge Raad, Case No. 16/05686, 24 November 2017

    001

    The court discusses general questions relating to the interpretation of the Convention as an international treaty, also in respect of the methods of interpretation laid down in the 1969 Vienna Convention; the relationship between the New York Convention and the UNCITRAL Model Law and Recommendation 2006. 

    Interpretation of the Convention
    500A Residual power to enforce notwithstanding existence of ground for refusal
    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"
    NETHERLANDS 60

    Netherlands 60. Turkish claimant v. Dutch defendant, Rechtbank, Gelderland, 19 April 2017

    203 Uniform rule
    204

    The court discusses whether the definition of what constitutes an “arbitration agreement in writing” in the sense of the Convention is an internationally uniform rule prevailing over domestic law, and whether this uniform rule sets a maximum or a minimum requirement for the formal validity of the arbitration agreement.

    Formal validity and municipal law
    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.
    221

    The court discusses which law – lex fori, lex contractus, law of the State where the award will be made – applies specifically to determining whether an agreement to arbitrate is “null and void etc.“, and, by extension, which law applies to determining the validity of arbitration agreements.

    Law applicable to "Null and void", etc. (for formal validity and applicable law, see Art. II, ¶204)
    NETHERLANDS 61

    Netherlands 61. Diag Human SE v. The Czech Republic, Gerechtshof, Amsterdam, Case No. 200.183.580/01, 21 February 2017

    502

    The court discusses the principle that the merits of the award may not be reviewed and that the court may only carry out a limited review of the award to ascertain grounds for refusal.

    No re-examination of the merits of the arbitral award
    513 Ground d: Irregularity in the composition of the arbitral tribunal or arbitral procedure
    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"
    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
    NETHERLANDS ANTILLES 4

    Gemeenschappelijk Hof van Justitie van Aruba, Curaçao, Sint Maarten en van Bonaire, Sint Eustatius en Saba, 15 November 2016 (Çukurova Holding A.S. v. Sonera Holding B.V.)

    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
    512 Ground c: Excess by arbitrator of his authority - Excess of authority
    NETHERLANDS 59

    Netherlands 59. Not indicated v. Not indicated, Gerechtshof, Amsterdam, 27 September 2016

    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"
    601

    The court discusses the conditions for granting adjournment of a proceeding relating to the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, and the court’s discretionary power to do so, as well the determination of “suitable security” and the power to request it.

    Adjournment of decision on enforcement
    NETHERLANDS 58

    Netherlands 58. Econet Wireless Limited v. Bharti Airtel Nigeria B.V., Gerechtshof, Amsterdam, 19 July 2016

    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
    601

    The court discusses the conditions for granting adjournment of a proceeding relating to the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, and the court’s discretionary power to do so, as well the determination of “suitable security” and the power to request it.

    Adjournment of decision on enforcement
    NETHERLANDS 57

    Netherlands 57. Nelux Holdings International N.V. v. US and … parties, Gerechsthof, Amsterdam, 29 March 2016, and Hoge Raad, 27 January 2017 and 31 March 2017

    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
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 56

    Netherlands 56. X BV v. Assuranceforeningen Skuld (Gjenslidig) et al., Rechtbank, Rotterdam, 23 December 2015

    221

    The court discusses which law – lex fori, lex contractus, law of the State where the award will be made – applies specifically to determining whether an agreement to arbitrate is “null and void etc.“, and, by extension, which law applies to determining the validity of arbitration agreements.

    Law applicable to "Null and void", etc. (for formal validity and applicable law, see Art. II, ¶204)
    NETHERLANDS 54

    Netherlands 54. Çukurova Holding A.S. v. Sonera Holding B.V., Court of Appeal of Amsterdam, 24 June 2014 and Supreme Court of the Netherlands, Case No. 14/04336, 1 May 2015

    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
    NETHERLANDS 55

    Netherlands 55 Marvesa AG v. OOO Gamma-Trade, Provisions Judge of the District Court of Rotterdam, Case No. C/10/464089/KG RK 14-2082, 3 April 2015 and 5 August 2015

    401

    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.

    Conditions to be fulfilled by petitioner in general
    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
    514 Ground e: Award not binding, suspended or set aside - "Binding"
    NETHERLANDS 53

    Netherlands 53. Voorzieningenrechter, Rechtbank, Amsterdam, 22 January 2015

    402

    The court discusses how to determine whether the document supplied is an award capable of being recognized and enforced, including whether the award is duly authenticated, and whether a copy is duly certified; whether a prior interim and/or partial award should be supplied together with the final award.

    Original or copy arbitral award
    403

    The court discusses issues relating to the requirement to supply the original arbitration agreement or a copy thereof to prove the prima facie validity of the arbitration agreement, as well as the application of more favorable municipal laws that do not provide for this requirement.

    Original or copy arbitration agreement
    406

    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.

    Translation (paragraph 2)
    514 Ground e: Award not binding, suspended or set aside - "Binding"
    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"
    601

    The court discusses the conditions for granting adjournment of a proceeding relating to the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, and the court’s discretionary power to do so, as well the determination of “suitable security” and the power to request it.

    Adjournment of decision on enforcement
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 49

    Netherlands 49. Gerechtshof, The Hague, 23 July 2013

    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
    NETHERLANDS 47

    Netherlands 47. Voorzieningenrechter, Rechtbank, Amsterdam, 28 March 2013

    500

    The court discusses the overall scheme and/or pro-enforcement bias of the Convention.

    Grounds for refusal of enforcement in general
    502

    The court discusses the principle that the merits of the award may not be reviewed and that the court may only carry out a limited review of the award to ascertain grounds for refusal.

    No re-examination of the merits of the arbitral award
    512 Ground c: Excess by arbitrator of his authority - Excess of authority
    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
    NETHERLANDS 48

    Netherlands 48. Gerechtshof, Amsterdam, 16 October 2012

    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
    NETHERLANDS 46

    Netherlands 46. Voorzieningenrechter, Rechtbank, Arnhem, 27 September 2012

    502

    The court discusses the principle that the merits of the award may not be reviewed and that the court may only carry out a limited review of the award to ascertain grounds for refusal.

    No re-examination of the merits of the arbitral award
    503

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

    Burden of proof on respondent
    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
    522

    Public policy: The court discusses the consequences of the lack of reasons in the award on its recognition and enforcement.

    Lack of reasons in award
    NETHERLANDS 45

    Netherlands 45. Gerechtshof, Amsterdam, 18 September 2012

    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"
    NETHERLANDS 43

    Netherlands 43. Voorzieningenrechter, Rechtbank, Amsterdam, 26 July 2012

    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
    401

    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.

    Conditions to be fulfilled by petitioner in general
    512 Ground c: Excess by arbitrator of his authority - Excess of authority
    514 Ground e: Award not binding, suspended or set aside - "Binding"
    523

    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.

    Irregularities in the arbitral procedure (see also Art. V(1)(b))
    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
    702

    More-favorable right provision: The court discusses examples of domestic laws of countries where enforcement of foreign awards is more favorable.

    Domestic law on enforcement of foreign award
    NETHERLANDS 52

    Netherlands 52. Voorzieningenrechter, Rechtbank, Amsterdam, 21 June 2012

    401

    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.

    Conditions to be fulfilled by petitioner in general
    601

    The court discusses the conditions for granting adjournment of a proceeding relating to the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, and the court’s discretionary power to do so, as well the determination of “suitable security” and the power to request it.

    Adjournment of decision on enforcement
    NETHERLANDS 42

    Netherlands 42. Voorzieningenrechter, Rechtbank, Amsterdam, 10 May 2012

    303

    The court discusses the conditions under which a party may be estopped from raising a ground for refusal of enforcement under the Convention or has waived the right to raise it.

    Estoppel/waiver
    306

    The court discusses the applicable period of limitation for seeking enforcement of an award.

    Period of limitation for enforcement
    402

    The court discusses how to determine whether the document supplied is an award capable of being recognized and enforced, including whether the award is duly authenticated, and whether a copy is duly certified; whether a prior interim and/or partial award should be supplied together with the final award.

    Original or copy arbitral award
    403

    The court discusses issues relating to the requirement to supply the original arbitration agreement or a copy thereof to prove the prima facie validity of the arbitration agreement, as well as the application of more favorable municipal laws that do not provide for this requirement.

    Original or copy arbitration agreement
    406

    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.

    Translation (paragraph 2)
    507

    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.

    Miscellaneous cases regarding the arbitration agreement
    512 Ground c: Excess by arbitrator of his authority - Excess of authority
    513 Ground d: Irregularity in the composition of the arbitral tribunal or arbitral procedure
    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"
    517

    Award not binding, suspended or set aside: The court discusses the meaning of an award having been “suspended” in the country of origin, including when the award has been suspended by operation of law rather than by a court decision.

    "Suspended"
    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
    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
    702

    More-favorable right provision: The court discusses examples of domestic laws of countries where enforcement of foreign awards is more favorable.

    Domestic law on enforcement of foreign award
    NETHERLANDS 51

    Netherlands 51. Voorzieningenrechter, Rechtbank, Amsterdam, 16 April 2012

    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
    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"
    601

    The court discusses the conditions for granting adjournment of a proceeding relating to the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, and the court’s discretionary power to do so, as well the determination of “suitable security” and the power to request it.

    Adjournment of decision on enforcement
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 40

    Netherlands 40. Voorzieningenrechter, Rechtbank, Rotterdam, 28 February 2011 and Gerechtshof, The Hague 20 December 2011

    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
    504 Paragraph 1 - Ground a: Invalidity of the arbitration agreement - Agreement referred to in Art. II
    506

    Invalidity of the arbitration agreement: The court discusses the law applicable to the validity of the arbitration agreement at the enforcement stage.

    Law applicable to the arbitration agreement
    508 Ground b: Violation of due process in general
    523

    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.

    Irregularities in the arbitral procedure (see also Art. V(1)(b))
    704(C) Art. VII(1): European Union (Treaties and Legislation)
    NETHERLANDS 41

    Netherlands 41. Voorzieningenrechter, Rechtbank, Amsterdam, 17 November 2011

    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"
    NETHERLANDS 50

    Netherlands 50. Voorzieningerechter, Rechtbank, Amsterdam, 1 September 2011

    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
    405

    The court discusses issues relating to the moment when the documents that are required for seeking recognition and enforcement must be supplied, and whether any defect can be cured later in the enforcement proceeding.

    "At the time of application"
    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"
    601

    The court discusses the conditions for granting adjournment of a proceeding relating to the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, and the court’s discretionary power to do so, as well the determination of “suitable security” and the power to request it.

    Adjournment of decision on enforcement
    NETHERLANDS 38

    Netherlands 38. Voorzieningenrechter, Rechtbank, Amsterdam, 9 June 2011

    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
    402

    The court discusses how to determine whether the document supplied is an award capable of being recognized and enforced, including whether the award is duly authenticated, and whether a copy is duly certified; whether a prior interim and/or partial award should be supplied together with the final award.

    Original or copy arbitral award
    517

    Award not binding, suspended or set aside: The court discusses the meaning of an award having been “suspended” in the country of origin, including when the award has been suspended by operation of law rather than by a court decision.

    "Suspended"
    601

    The court discusses the conditions for granting adjournment of a proceeding relating to the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, and the court’s discretionary power to do so, as well the determination of “suitable security” and the power to request it.

    Adjournment of decision on enforcement
    NETHERLANDS 39

    Netherlands 39. Voorzieningenrechter, Rechtbank, Amsterdam, 24 February 2011

    512 Ground c: Excess by arbitrator of his authority - Excess of authority
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 44

    Netherlands 44. Voorzieningenrechter, Rechtbank, Amsterdam, 30 December 2010

    511

    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.

    "Otherwise unable to present his case"
    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
    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
    NETHERLANDS 37

    Netherlands 37. Hoge Raad, First Chamber, 24 December 2010

    110

    The court discusses the definition of “arbitral award”, and the application of the Convention to the various types of award, including awards on specific performance, awards enjoining a party from certain conduct, declaratory awards, etc. Also, whether preliminary, partial, interim, interlocutory awards, and awards by consent can be enforced under the Convention.

    Arbitral award: types
    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
    514 Ground e: Award not binding, suspended or set aside - "Binding"
    NETHERLANDS 36

    Netherlands 36. Voorzieningenrechter, Rechtbank, Middelburg, 3 September 2010

    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"
    NETHERLANDS 35

    Netherlands 35. Voorzieningenrechter, Rechtbank, Dordrecht, 30 June 2010

    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
    303

    The court discusses the conditions under which a party may be estopped from raising a ground for refusal of enforcement under the Convention or has waived the right to raise it.

    Estoppel/waiver
    401

    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.

    Conditions to be fulfilled by petitioner in general
    507

    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.

    Miscellaneous cases regarding the arbitration agreement
    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
    601

    The court discusses the conditions for granting adjournment of a proceeding relating to the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, and the court’s discretionary power to do so, as well the determination of “suitable security” and the power to request it.

    Adjournment of decision on enforcement
    702

    More-favorable right provision: The court discusses examples of domestic laws of countries where enforcement of foreign awards is more favorable.

    Domestic law on enforcement of foreign award
    NETHERLANDS 34

    Netherlands 34. Hoge Raad, First Chamber, 25 June 2010

    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
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 33

    Netherlands 33. Rechtbank, Rotterdam, 29 July 2009

    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
    203-204 Formal validity, uniform law and municipal law
    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.
    221

    The court discusses which law – lex fori, lex contractus, law of the State where the award will be made – applies specifically to determining whether an agreement to arbitrate is “null and void etc.“, and, by extension, which law applies to determining the validity of arbitration agreements.

    Law applicable to "Null and void", etc. (for formal validity and applicable law, see Art. II, ¶204)
    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
    702

    More-favorable right provision: The court discusses examples of domestic laws of countries where enforcement of foreign awards is more favorable.

    Domestic law on enforcement of foreign award
    NETHERLANDS 32

    Netherlands 32. Voorzieningenrechter, Rechtbank, Amsterdam, 18 June 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)
    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
    401

    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.

    Conditions to be fulfilled by petitioner in general
    406

    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.

    Translation (paragraph 2)
    509

    Due process: The court discusses what constitutes “proper notice” of the appointment of the arbitrators or of the arbitration proceedings.

    "Proper notice"
    510

    Due process: The court discusses what are to be considered proper time limits and notice periods that fulfill the requirement that the party opposing recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award was extended due process.

    Time limits and notice periods
    511

    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.

    "Otherwise unable to present his case"
    522

    Public policy: The court discusses the consequences of the lack of reasons in the award on its recognition and enforcement.

    Lack of reasons in award
    601

    The court discusses the conditions for granting adjournment of a proceeding relating to the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, and the court’s discretionary power to do so, as well the determination of “suitable security” and the power to request it.

    Adjournment of decision on enforcement
    NETHERLANDS 31

    Netherlands 31. Gerechtshof, Amsterdam, 28 April 2009

    504 Paragraph 1 - Ground a: Invalidity of the arbitration agreement - Agreement referred to in Art. II
    511

    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.

    "Otherwise unable to present his case"
    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"
    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
    NETHERLANDS ANTILLES 3

    Netherlands Antilles 3. Gemeenschappelijk Hof van Justitie van de Nederlandse Antillen en Aruba, 10 March 2009

    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"
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 30

    Netherlands 30. Rechtbank, Leeuwarden, 3 September 2008

    208

    The court discusses arbitration agreements contained in a sales and purchase confirmation and whether a tacit acceptance thereof is sufficient.

    Sales or purchase confirmation
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 29

    Netherlands 29. Voorzieningenrechter, Rechtbank, The Hague, 27 May 2004 and Gerechtshof, The Hague, 24 March 2005

    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
    704(C) Art. VII(1): European Union (Treaties and Legislation)
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 27

    Netherlands 27. Rechtbank, Amsterdam, 27 August 2002

    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)
    513 Ground d: Irregularity in the composition of the arbitral tribunal or arbitral procedure
    523

    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.

    Irregularities in the arbitral procedure (see also Art. V(1)(b))
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 26

    Netherlands 26. Rechtbank, Almelo, 19 July 2000

    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
    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
    702

    More-favorable right provision: The court discusses examples of domestic laws of countries where enforcement of foreign awards is more favorable.

    Domestic law on enforcement of foreign award
    NETHERLANDS 28

    Netherlands 28. Gerechtshof, The Hague, 22 February 2000

    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
    209 Incorporation by reference and standard conditions
    211

    The court discusses issues specific to bills of lading and charterparties, such as whether the subsequent holder of the bill of lading is bound by the arbitration agreement therein and whether the arbitration clause in the charterparty is incorporated into the bill of lading.

    Bill of lading and charter party
    214-216 Field of application
    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.
    221

    The court discusses which law – lex fori, lex contractus, law of the State where the award will be made – applies specifically to determining whether an agreement to arbitrate is “null and void etc.“, and, by extension, which law applies to determining the validity of arbitration agreements.

    Law applicable to "Null and void", etc. (for formal validity and applicable law, see Art. II, ¶204)
    223

    The court discusses whether a certain dispute could be settled by arbitration, and the law applicable to that determination.

    Arbitrability (see also Art. V(2) sub ground a. "arbitrability", ¶519)
    702

    More-favorable right provision: The court discusses examples of domestic laws of countries where enforcement of foreign awards is more favorable.

    Domestic law on enforcement of foreign award
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 25

    Netherlands 25. Rechtbank, Zutphen, 11 November 1998

    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)
    106

    The court discusses issues relating to the identity of the party against whom enforcement of the arbitral award is sought, including: piercing of the corporate veil, succession, assignment, State or State entity, group of companies, agent or principal, etc. For the related defenses to enforcement, see Art. V(1)(a).

    Problems concerning the identity of a party
    202

    The court discusses the form in which the arbitration agreement is expressed: short form arbitration clause, reference to rules of institution, etc.

    Contents of arbitration agreement
    303

    The court discusses the conditions under which a party may be estopped from raising a ground for refusal of enforcement under the Convention or has waived the right to raise it.

    Estoppel/waiver
    406

    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.

    Translation (paragraph 2)
    500

    The court discusses the overall scheme and/or pro-enforcement bias of the Convention.

    Grounds for refusal of enforcement in general
    502

    The court discusses the principle that the merits of the award may not be reviewed and that the court may only carry out a limited review of the award to ascertain grounds for refusal.

    No re-examination of the merits of the arbitral award
    507

    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.

    Miscellaneous cases regarding the arbitration agreement
    511

    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.

    "Otherwise unable to present his case"
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 24

    Netherlands 24. Gerechtshof, The Hague, 28 April 1998 and President, Rechtbank, Rotterdam, 2 October 1997

    511

    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.

    "Otherwise unable to present his case"
    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"
    523

    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.

    Irregularities in the arbitral procedure (see also Art. V(1)(b))
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 23

    Netherlands 23. Rechtbank, Zutphen, 3 September 1996

    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)
    502

    The court discusses the principle that the merits of the award may not be reviewed and that the court may only carry out a limited review of the award to ascertain grounds for refusal.

    No re-examination of the merits of the arbitral award
    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
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 22

    Netherlands 22. Rechtbank, Rotterdam, 28 September 1995

    211

    The court discusses issues specific to bills of lading and charterparties, such as whether the subsequent holder of the bill of lading is bound by the arbitration agreement therein and whether the arbitration clause in the charterparty is incorporated into the bill of lading.

    Bill of lading and charter party
    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
    223

    The court discusses whether a certain dispute could be settled by arbitration, and the law applicable to that determination.

    Arbitrability (see also Art. V(2) sub ground a. "arbitrability", ¶519)
    702

    More-favorable right provision: The court discusses examples of domestic laws of countries where enforcement of foreign awards is more favorable.

    Domestic law on enforcement of foreign award
    NETHERLANDS 20

    Netherlands 20. Gerechtshof, 's Hertogenbosch, 14 July 1995 and President, Rechtbank, Breda, 8 March 1995

    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)
    209 Incorporation by reference and standard conditions
    401

    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.

    Conditions to be fulfilled by petitioner in general
    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
    601

    The court discusses the conditions for granting adjournment of a proceeding relating to the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, and the court’s discretionary power to do so, as well the determination of “suitable security” and the power to request it.

    Adjournment of decision on enforcement
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 19

    Netherlands 19. President, Rechtbank, Rotterdam, 24 November 1994

    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
    506

    Invalidity of the arbitration agreement: The court discusses the law applicable to the validity of the arbitration agreement at the enforcement stage.

    Law applicable to the arbitration agreement
    507

    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.

    Miscellaneous cases regarding the arbitration agreement
    511

    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.

    "Otherwise unable to present his case"
    512 Ground c: Excess by arbitrator of his authority - Excess of authority
    522

    Public policy: The court discusses the consequences of the lack of reasons in the award on its recognition and enforcement.

    Lack of reasons in award
    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
    601

    The court discusses the conditions for granting adjournment of a proceeding relating to the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, and the court’s discretionary power to do so, as well the determination of “suitable security” and the power to request it.

    Adjournment of decision on enforcement
    702

    More-favorable right provision: The court discusses examples of domestic laws of countries where enforcement of foreign awards is more favorable.

    Domestic law on enforcement of foreign award
    704(B) Bilateral Treaties
    NETHERLANDS 17

    Netherlands 17. Gerechtshof, 's Hertogenbosch, 28 October 1994 and President, Rechtbank, Maastricht, 15 June 1994

    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)
    502

    The court discusses the principle that the merits of the award may not be reviewed and that the court may only carry out a limited review of the award to ascertain grounds for refusal.

    No re-examination of the merits of the arbitral award
    601

    The court discusses the conditions for granting adjournment of a proceeding relating to the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, and the court’s discretionary power to do so, as well the determination of “suitable security” and the power to request it.

    Adjournment of decision on enforcement
    NETHERLANDS 21

    Netherlands 21. Rechtbank, Zwolle, 12 January 1994

    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
    228

    Related court proceedings: The court discusses whether provisional measures, such as the pre-award attachment of assets, are compatible with the Convention.

    Pre-award attachment and other provisional measures
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 15

    Netherlands 15. Gerechtshof, The Hague, 4 August 1993

    209 Incorporation by reference and standard conditions
    405

    The court discusses issues relating to the moment when the documents that are required for seeking recognition and enforcement must be supplied, and whether any defect can be cured later in the enforcement proceeding.

    "At the time of application"
    506

    Invalidity of the arbitration agreement: The court discusses the law applicable to the validity of the arbitration agreement at the enforcement stage.

    Law applicable to the arbitration agreement
    702

    More-favorable right provision: The court discusses examples of domestic laws of countries where enforcement of foreign awards is more favorable.

    Domestic law on enforcement of foreign award
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS ANTILLES 2

    Netherlands Antilles 2. Gemeenschappelijk Hof van Justitie van de Nederlandse Antillen en Aruba, 22 December 1992

    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
    NETHERLANDS 16

    Netherlands 16. Gerechtshof, Amsterdam, 16 July 1992

    523

    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.

    Irregularities in the arbitral procedure (see also Art. V(1)(b))
    702

    More-favorable right provision: The court discusses examples of domestic laws of countries where enforcement of foreign awards is more favorable.

    Domestic law on enforcement of foreign award
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 14

    Netherlands 14. President, Rechtbank, Amsterdam, 24 April 1991

    509

    Due process: The court discusses what constitutes “proper notice” of the appointment of the arbitrators or of the arbitration proceedings.

    "Proper notice"
    520

    Public policy:The court discusses the consequences of the default of a party in the arbitration on the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award against it.

    Ground b: Public policy - Default of party
    702

    More-favorable right provision: The court discusses examples of domestic laws of countries where enforcement of foreign awards is more favorable.

    Domestic law on enforcement of foreign award
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 18

    Netherlands 18. Rechtbank, Rotterdam, 21 December 1990

    209 Incorporation by reference and standard conditions
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 13

    Netherlands 13. Gerechtshof, The Hague, 28 April 1988

    601

    The court discusses the conditions for granting adjournment of a proceeding relating to the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, and the court’s discretionary power to do so, as well the determination of “suitable security” and the power to request it.

    Adjournment of decision on enforcement
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS ANTILLES 1

    Netherlands Antilles 1. Court of First Instance of the Netherlands Antilles, Curaçao, 20 January 1987 (preliminary judgment) and 16 May 1987 (final judgment)

    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.
    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
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 12

    Netherlands 12. President, Rechtbank, Utrecht, 22 November 1984

    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
    401

    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.

    Conditions to be fulfilled by petitioner in general
    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"
    NETHERLANDS 10

    Netherlands 10. President, Rechtbank, Amsterdam, 12 July 1984

    106

    The court discusses issues relating to the identity of the party against whom enforcement of the arbitral award is sought, including: piercing of the corporate veil, succession, assignment, State or State entity, group of companies, agent or principal, etc. For the related defenses to enforcement, see Art. V(1)(a).

    Problems concerning the identity of a party
    406

    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.

    Translation (paragraph 2)
    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
    502

    The court discusses the principle that the merits of the award may not be reviewed and that the court may only carry out a limited review of the award to ascertain grounds for refusal.

    No re-examination of the merits of the arbitral award
    514 Ground e: Award not binding, suspended or set aside - "Binding"
    517

    Award not binding, suspended or set aside: The court discusses the meaning of an award having been “suspended” in the country of origin, including when the award has been suspended by operation of law rather than by a court decision.

    "Suspended"
    601

    The court discusses the conditions for granting adjournment of a proceeding relating to the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, and the court’s discretionary power to do so, as well the determination of “suitable security” and the power to request it.

    Adjournment of decision on enforcement
    NETHERLANDS 9

    Netherlands 9. Gerechtshof, The Hague, 17 February 1984

    209 Incorporation by reference and standard conditions
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 11

    Netherlands 11. President, Rechtbank, Dordrecht, 18 August 1982

    303

    The court discusses the conditions under which a party may be estopped from raising a ground for refusal of enforcement under the Convention or has waived the right to raise it.

    Estoppel/waiver
    401

    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.

    Conditions to be fulfilled by petitioner in general
    504 Paragraph 1 - Ground a: Invalidity of the arbitration agreement - Agreement referred to in Art. II
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 8

    Netherlands 8. President, Rechtbank, Zutphen, 9 December 1981

    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
    401

    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.

    Conditions to be fulfilled by petitioner in general
    514 Ground e: Award not binding, suspended or set aside - "Binding"
    517

    Award not binding, suspended or set aside: The court discusses the meaning of an award having been “suspended” in the country of origin, including when the award has been suspended by operation of law rather than by a court decision.

    "Suspended"
    704(B) Bilateral Treaties
    NETHERLANDS 6 B

    See also President, Rechtbank, Rotterdam, 14 April 1980 (Keck Seng (S) Pte Ltd. and K.S. Edible Oil (Hong Kong) Ltd v. Hunt-Wesson Foods, Inc.) NETHERLANDS 6 A

    Gerechtshof, The Hague, 10 April 1981, case no. 496 R 80

    (Keck Seng (S) Pte Ltd. and K.S. Edible Oil (Hong Kong) Ltd v. Hunt-Wesson Foods, Inc.)

    401

    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.

    Conditions to be fulfilled by petitioner in general
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 6 A

    See also Gerechtshof, The Hague, 10 April 1981, case no. 496 R 80  (Keck Seng (S) Pte Ltd. and K.S. Edible Oil (Hong Kong) Ltd v. Hunt-Wesson Foods, Inc.) NETHERLANDS 6 B

    President, Rechtbank, Rotterdam, 14 April 1980

    (Keck Seng (S) Pte Ltd. and K.S. Edible Oil (Hong Kong) Ltd v. Hunt-Wesson Foods, Inc.)

    401

    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.

    Conditions to be fulfilled by petitioner in general
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 7

    Netherlands 7. Rechtbank, Alkmaar, 18 October 1979

    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
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 4

    Netherlands 4. President, Rechtbank, Amsterdam, 14 December 1977

    105

    The court discusses issues relating to the quality of the parties, as physical or legal persons against whom enforcement of an arbitral award is sought, including the incapacity of a State to enter into an arbitration agreement, and questions relating to sovereign immunity. For the related defenses to enforcement, see Art. V(1)(a).

    "Persons, whether physical or legal" (paragraph 1) (including sovereign immunity)
    106

    The court discusses issues relating to the identity of the party against whom enforcement of the arbitral award is sought, including: piercing of the corporate veil, succession, assignment, State or State entity, group of companies, agent or principal, etc. For the related defenses to enforcement, see Art. V(1)(a).

    Problems concerning the identity of a party
    503

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

    Burden of proof on respondent
    505 Incapacity of party
    511

    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.

    "Otherwise unable to present his case"
    514 Ground e: Award not binding, suspended or set aside - "Binding"
    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
    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
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 2 D

    See also Gerechtshof, The Hague, 8 September 1972 (Société Européenne d’Etudes et d’Entreprises – SEEE v. Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) NETHERLANDS 2 A

    Hoge Raad, 26 October 1973 (Société Européenne d’Etudes et d’Entreprises – SEEE v. Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) NETHERLANDS 2 B

    Gerechtshof, The Hague, 25 October 1974 (Société Européenne d’Etudes et d’Entreprises – SEEE v. Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) NETHERLANDS 2 C

    Hoge Raad, 7 November 1975

    (Société Européenne d’Etudes et d’Entreprises – SEEE v. Federal Republic of Yugoslavia)

    109

    The court discusses whether an “a-national” award falls under the Convention. 

    Arbitral award: "a-national" award
    112

    The court discusses whether the Convention may be applied retroactively and, if so, as of when: e.g., with the conclusion of the arbitration agreement, the commencement of arbitration, the rendition of the award.

    Retroactivity
    502

    The court discusses the principle that the merits of the award may not be reviewed and that the court may only carry out a limited review of the award to ascertain grounds for refusal.

    No re-examination of the merits of the arbitral award
    513 Ground d: Irregularity in the composition of the arbitral tribunal or arbitral procedure
    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"
    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
    NETHERLANDS 2 C

    See also Gerechtshof, The Hague, 8 September 1972 (Société Européenne d’Etudes et d’Entreprises – SEEE v. Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) NETHERLANDS 2 A

    Hoge Raad, 26 October 1973 (Société Européenne d’Etudes et d’Entreprises – SEEE v. Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) NETHERLANDS 2 B

    and

    Hoge Raad, 7 November 1975 (Société Européenne d’Etudes et d’Entreprises – SEEE v. Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) NETHERLANDS 2 D

    Gerechtshof, The Hague, 25 October 1974 

    (Société Européenne d’Etudes et d’Entreprises – SEEE v. Federal Republic of Yugoslavia)

    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
    NETHERLANDS 2 B

    See also Gerechtshof, The Hague, 8 September 1972 (Société Européenne d’Etudes et d’Entreprises – SEEE v. Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) NETHERLANDS 2 A

    Gerechtshof, The Hague, 25 October 1974 (Société Européenne d’Etudes et d’Entreprises – SEEE v. Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) NETHERLANDS 2 C

    and

    Hoge Raad, 7 November 1975 (Société Européenne d’Etudes et d’Entreprises – SEEE v. Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) NETHERLANDS 2 D

    Hoge Raad, 26 October 1973

    (Société Européenne d’Etudes et d’Entreprises – SEEE v. Federal Republic of Yugoslavia)

    103

    The court discusses the impact of the nationality of the parties on the application of the Convention. 

    Nationality of the parties no criterion
    105

    The court discusses issues relating to the quality of the parties, as physical or legal persons against whom enforcement of an arbitral award is sought, including the incapacity of a State to enter into an arbitration agreement, and questions relating to sovereign immunity. For the related defenses to enforcement, see Art. V(1)(a).

    "Persons, whether physical or legal" (paragraph 1) (including sovereign immunity)
    109

    The court discusses whether an “a-national” award falls under the Convention. 

    Arbitral award: "a-national" award
    505 Incapacity of party
    513 Ground d: Irregularity in the composition of the arbitral tribunal or arbitral procedure
    NETHERLANDS 3

    Netherlands 3. President, Rechtbank, The Hague, 26 April 1973

    303

    The court discusses the conditions under which a party may be estopped from raising a ground for refusal of enforcement under the Convention or has waived the right to raise it.

    Estoppel/waiver
    402

    The court discusses how to determine whether the document supplied is an award capable of being recognized and enforced, including whether the award is duly authenticated, and whether a copy is duly certified; whether a prior interim and/or partial award should be supplied together with the final award.

    Original or copy arbitral award
    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
    506

    Invalidity of the arbitration agreement: The court discusses the law applicable to the validity of the arbitration agreement at the enforcement stage.

    Law applicable to the arbitration agreement
    512 Ground c: Excess by arbitrator of his authority - Excess of authority
    514 Ground e: Award not binding, suspended or set aside - "Binding"
    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
    NETHERLANDS 5 B

    See also President, Rechtbank, The Hague, 23 June 1972 (Weinstein International Corporation v. Nagtegaal N.V.) NETHERLANDS 5 A

    Gerechtshof, The Hague, 19 April 1973, request no. 408 H 72

    (Weinstein International Corporation v. Nagtegaal N.V.)

    406

    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.

    Translation (paragraph 2)
    704(B) Bilateral Treaties
    705

    The court discusses the relationship between the New York Convention, the Geneva Protocol on Arbitration Clauses of 1923, and the Geneva Convention on the Execution of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1927.

    Relationship with Geneva Treaties of 1923 and 1927
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 2 A

    See also Hoge Raad, 26 October 1973 (Société Européenne d’Etudes et d’Entreprises – SEEE v. Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) NETHERLANDS 2 B

    Gerechtshof, The Hague, 25 October 1974 (Société Européenne d’Etudes et d’Entreprises – SEEE v. Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) NETHERLANDS 2 C

    and

    Hoge Raad, 7 November 1975 (Société Européenne d’Etudes et d’Entreprises – SEEE v. Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) NETHERLANDS 2 D

    Gerechtshof, The Hague, 8 September 1972 

    (Société Européenne d’Etudes et d’Entreprises – SEEE v. Federal Republic of Yugoslavia)

    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)
    103

    The court discusses the impact of the nationality of the parties on the application of the Convention. 

    Nationality of the parties no criterion
    105

    The court discusses issues relating to the quality of the parties, as physical or legal persons against whom enforcement of an arbitral award is sought, including the incapacity of a State to enter into an arbitration agreement, and questions relating to sovereign immunity. For the related defenses to enforcement, see Art. V(1)(a).

    "Persons, whether physical or legal" (paragraph 1) (including sovereign immunity)
    109

    The court discusses whether an “a-national” award falls under the Convention. 

    Arbitral award: "a-national" award
    505 Incapacity of party
    513 Ground d: Irregularity in the composition of the arbitral tribunal or arbitral procedure
    NETHERLANDS 5 A

    See also Gerechtshof, The Hague, 19 April 1973, request no. 408 H 72 (Weinstein International Corporation v. Nagtegaal N.V.) NETHERLANDS 5 B

    President, Rechtbank, The Hague, 23 June 1972

    (Weinstein International Corporation v. Nagtegaal N.V.)

    406

    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.

    Translation (paragraph 2)
    704(B) Bilateral Treaties
    705

    The court discusses the relationship between the New York Convention, the Geneva Protocol on Arbitration Clauses of 1923, and the Geneva Convention on the Execution of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1927.

    Relationship with Geneva Treaties of 1923 and 1927
  • Excerpt Topics
    NETHERLANDS 1

    Netherlands 1. Rechtbank, Rotterdam, 26 June 1970

    206

    The court discusses the second alternative requirement of Art. II(2) that the arbitration agreement is “contained in an exchange of letters or telegrams”.

    Exchange of letters or telegrams