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
    SWEDEN 16

    Högsta Domstolen, 19 June 2018
    Adelina Gross AB v Promlinus D.O.O. Prokuplje

    Högsta Domstolen, 19 June 2018
    Adelina Gross AB v Promlinus D.O.O. Prokuplje

    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
    SWEDEN 14

    Högsta Domstolen, 4 May 2018
    Belaya ptitsa-Kursk v. Robot Grader AB

    Högsta Domstolen, 4 May 2018
    Belaya ptitsa-Kursk v. Robot Grader AB

    508 Ground b: Violation of due process in general
    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
    SWEDEN 15

    Högsta Domstolen, 4 May 2018
    J. O. P. v. Smart Board Production AB

    Högsta Domstolen, 4 May 2018
    J. O. P. v. Smart Board Production AB

    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
    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
    SWEDEN 13

    Högsta Domstolen, 30 March 2017
    Industrial Consulting and Trading International J-E Johansson AB v. 
OOO Juriditjeskaja Kompanija

    Högsta Domstolen, 30 March 2017
    Industrial Consulting and Trading International J-E Johansson AB v. 
OOO Juriditjeskaja Kompanija

    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)
    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
    SWEDEN 10

    Svea Hovrätt, Department 02, 22 November 2013 
and Högsta Domstolen, 2 June 2015
    Subway International B.V. v. E

    Svea Hovrätt, Department 02, 22 November 2013 
and Högsta Domstolen, 2 June 2015
    Subway International B.V. v. E

    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
    SWEDEN 12

    Högsta Domstolen, 17 June 2015
    H.K. with the stated company name of ATB Tjänst v. Finants 
Collect OÜ

    Högsta Domstolen, 17 June 2015
    H.K. with the stated company name of ATB Tjänst v. Finants 
Collect OÜ

    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
    500

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

    Grounds for refusal of enforcement in general
  • Excerpt Topics
    SWEDEN 11

    Högsta Domstolen, 18 March 2014
    The estate of Juan Aramendia Rosas v. NCC International Aktiebolag

    Högsta Domstolen, 18 March 2014
    The estate of Juan Aramendia Rosas v. NCC International Aktiebolag

    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
    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
  • Excerpt Topics
    SWEDEN 9

    Svea Hovrätt, Department 02, 20 September 2013
    Subway International B.V. v. B

    Svea Hovrätt, Department 02, 20 September 2013
    Subway International B.V. v. B

    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
  • Excerpt Topics
    SWEDEN 8

    Sweden 8. Högsta Domstolen, 12 November 2010

    224

    The court discusses whether a declaratory judgment on the validity of the arbitration agreement is available under the Convention.

    Declaratory judgment on validity arbitration agreement
    SWEDEN 7

    Sweden 7. Högsta Domstolen, 16 April 2010

    509

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

    "Proper notice"
  • Excerpt Topics
    SWEDEN 6

    Sweden 6. Svea Court of Appeal, 7 September 2001

    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
    SWEDEN 5

    Sweden 5. Svea Court of Appeal, 21 March 2001

    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
    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
  • Excerpt Topics
    SWEDEN 4

    Sweden 4. Supreme Court, 23 November 1992

    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
    SWEDEN 3

    Sweden 3. Supreme Court, 18 April 1989

    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
    SWEDEN 2

    Sweden 2. Svea Court of Appeal, 18 June 1980

    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)
    505 Incapacity of party
    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
  • Excerpt Topics
    SWEDEN 1

    Sweden 1. Supreme Court, 13 August 1979 and Svea Court of Appeal, 13 December 1978

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