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
    CHILE 2024-2

    The Supreme Court granted leave to enforce a California award, finding that the respondent had been duly notified of the arbitration, the dispute was arbitrable, and exequatur would not violate Chilean public policy. Hence, there were no grounds for refusal under the New York Convention. The Court stressed at the outset that in the exequatur proceedings neither the merits of the awards nor defences to be raised at the stage of the award’s execution were discussed, the latter falling within the scope of the competence of the execution court.

    Corte Suprema de Justicia de Chile, First Civil Chamber, 27 July 2023, ROL no. 133313-2022

    (Ashlock Company Division of Vistan Corporation v. Procesadora Rengo SpA)

    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
    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
    509

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

    "Proper notice"
    518

    Public policy: The court discusses the meaning of (international as compared to domestic) public policy, generally defined as the basic notions of morality and justice of the enforcement State.

    Paragraph 2 - Distinction domestic-international public policy
    519

    Public policy: The court discusses cases in which the subject matter of the award was not arbitrable in the enforcement State on public policy grounds.

    Ground a: Arbitrability
    CHILE 2024-1

    The Supreme Court granted exequatur of an award of a tribunal of the Beijing Arbitration Commission, holding that the formal requirements under Art. 35(2) of Law No. 19.971, the Chilean Arbitration Law, mirroring Art. IV of the Convention, were met, and that the respondent had not raised any ground for refusal under Art. 36(1)(a), mirroring Art. V(1), as it had not participated in the exequatur proceeding. The Court added that in any case there had been no violation of due process in the arbitration, because the respondent had been duly notified of the commencement of the arbitration and its subsequent steps, though it had chosen not to participate (Art. 36(1)(a)(ii), mirroring Art. V(1)(b)). Nor would exequatur violate public policy, as the award had been rendered in fair proceedings in which the respondent could have presented its case, had it appeared (Art. 36(1)(b)(ii), mirroring Art. V(2)(b)), Finally, the dispute concerned the performance of an international commercial contract and was therefore arbitrable (Art. 36(1)(b)(i), mirroring Art. V(2)(a)).

    Corte Suprema de Justicia de Chile, First Civil Chamber, 5 July 2023, Case no. 124338-2020

    (Qidong Adi Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd v. Import Export Italy Trading SpA)

    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
    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
    509

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

    "Proper notice"
    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
    CHILE 2024-1

    The Supreme Court granted exequatur of an award of a tribunal of the Beijing Arbitration Commission, holding that the formal requirements under Art. 35(2) of Law No. 19.971, the Chilean Arbitration Law, mirroring Art. IV of the Convention, were met, and that the respondent had not raised any ground for refusal under Art. 36(1)(a), mirroring Art. V(1), as it had not participated in the exequatur proceeding. The Court added that in any case there had been no violation of due process in the arbitration, because the respondent had been duly notified of the commencement of the arbitration and its subsequent steps, though it had chosen not to participate (Art. 36(1)(a)(ii), mirroring Art. V(1)(b)). Nor would exequatur violate public policy, as the award had been rendered in fair proceedings in which the respondent could have presented its case, had it appeared (Art. 36(1)(b)(ii), mirroring Art. V(2)(b)), Finally, the dispute concerned the performance of an international commercial contract and was therefore arbitrable (Art. 36(1)(b)(i), mirroring Art. V(2)(a)).

    Corte Suprema de Justicia de Chile, First Civil Chamber, 5 July 2023, Case no. 124338-2020

    (Qidong Adi Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd v. Import Export Italy Trading SpA)

    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
    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
    509

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

    "Proper notice"
    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
    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
    CHILE 10

    The Supreme Court rejected all the objections to enforcement of an AAA award, holding, inter alia, that no official authentication of the award by the courts of the place of the arbitration was necessary, since neither the Chilean arbitration law nor the New York Convention set this requirement.

    Corte Suprema, First Chamber, 9 July 2019
    (Bose Corporation v. MusicWorld Audiovisión Ltda.)
     

    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
    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
    509

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

    "Proper notice"
    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
  • Excerpt Topics
    CHILE 9

    Chile 9. Klion v. Pesquera Villa Alegre S.A., Corte Suprema de Justicia, No. 41.841-2017, 26 July 2018

    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
    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
    509

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

    "Proper notice"
    514 Ground e: Award not binding, suspended or set aside - "Binding"
  • Excerpt Topics
    CHILE 8

    Chile 8. Almendra y Miel S.A., v. Agrícola Comercial e Inversiones El Camino S.A., Corte Suprema de Justicia, No. 82.442-2016, 30 November 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
    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
    404

    The court discusses issues relating to the manner of authentication and certification of the award and/or arbitration agreement.

    Authentication and certification
    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
    509

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

    "Proper notice"
    514 Ground e: Award not binding, suspended or set aside - "Binding"
    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
  • Excerpt Topics
    CHILE 7

    Chile 7. Bakalland S.A. v. Agroprodex Internacional S.A., Corte Suprema de Justicia, No. 24.348-2016, 29 November 2016

    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
    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
    509

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

    "Proper notice"
    CHILE 6

    Chile 6. Qisheng Resources Limited v. Minera Santa Fe, Corte Suprema, 21 April 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
    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"
    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
    CHILE 5

    Chile 5. P1, EDF Internacional SA v. (1) Endesa Latinoamericana SA, (2) YPF SA, Corte Suprema, No. 4.390-2010, 8 September 2011

    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)
    404

    The court discusses issues relating to the manner of authentication and certification of the award and/or arbitration agreement.

    Authentication and certification
    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(A) Panama Convention of 1975
  • Excerpt Topics
    CHILE 4

    Chile 4. Stemcor UK Limited v. Compañía Comercial Metalúrgica Limitada, Corte Suprema, No. 1.724-10, 21 June 2010

    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"
    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
  • Excerpt Topics
    CHILE 3

    Chile 3. Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau v. Inversiones Errázuriz Limitada, Corte Suprema, No. 5.228-2008, 15 December 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
    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
    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"
    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
    CHILE 2

    Chile 2. Comverse Inc. v. American Telecommunication, Inc., Corte Suprema, No. 3225-08, 8 September 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)
    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)
    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
    508 Ground b: Violation of due process in general
    514 Ground e: Award not binding, suspended or set aside - "Binding"
  • Excerpt Topics
    CHILE 1

    Chile 1. Corte Suprema, First Chamber, 11 January 2007

    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
    500

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

    Grounds for refusal of enforcement in general
    514 Ground e: Award not binding, suspended or set aside - "Binding"