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
    FRANCE 64

    Cour d’Appel, Paris, International Commercial Chamber, Pole 5, Chamber 16, 6 June 2023, no. 54/2023

    (Malaysia v. Nurhima Kiram Fornan 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
    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
    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
    FRANCE 2024-1

    The Court of Appeal affirmed the ex parte order granting exequatur of a Swiss award rendered in an arbitration under a BIT. It found that the arbitral tribunal had had jurisdiction, because the it was irrelevant that the settlement agreement on which Etrak’s claims were based had been annulled by a Tripoli court prior to the rendition of the award. Whether the settlement agreement could be the basis for a claim under the BIT was a question to be answered solely in light of the wording of the BIT, and according to that wording, the Court found, the settlement agreement fell within the BIT’s scope. The Court also dismissed Libya’s argument that exequatur would violate public policy, because it was irreconcilable with the earlier judgment of the Tripoli court. The Court reasoned that, while exequatur of the award and the Libyan decision were indeed irreconcilable, the latter had not yet been recognized in France.

    Cour d’Appel, Paris, International Commercial Chamber, Pole 5, Chamber 16, 14 March 2023, No. 24/2023

    (State of Libya v. Etrak Insaat Taahhüt Ve Ticaret Anonim Sirketi)

    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
    FRANCE 14 March 2023 CA Versailles Alstom

    The Court of Appeal affirmed the order granting recognition and enforcement of an ICC award rendered in Geneva against Alstom, dismissing objections of violation of public policy and due process. The Court found no evidence of corruption in the case, noting in particular that the fact that representatives of Alexander Brothers (ABL) had met with the Chinese Minister of Railways during the execution of one of the parties’ contracts, and that the Minister had later been convicted for corruption unrelated to ABL, was not sufficient to constitute a serious and specific indication of bribery. The Court also held that there had been no violation of due process in the arbitration, as it appeared that Alstom had in fact discussed the Swiss law principle adopted by the arbitrators to reach their decision – according to which when the subsequent behavior of the parties is contrary to the provisions of their contract, this behavior must be considered as an implicit modification of the contract. The Court did not refer expressly to the New York Convention. (SEE ALSO the earlier decision of the Cour de Cassation in this case, dated 29 September 2021.)

    Cour d’Appel, Versailles, First Chamber, First Section, 14 March 2023, File no. RG 21/06191

    (S.A. Alstom Transport et al. v. Alexander Brothers Ltd)

     

    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
  • Excerpt Topics
    FRANCE 11 January 2022 Benin v SGS

    The Court granted exequatur of an ICC award rendered in Burkina Faso, which had been set aside at the seat, explaining that the annulment had no consequence on exequatur, because international awards are not subject to any state legal system and their validity must be examined solely under the rules applicable in the enforcement country – here, France. Applying the French Code of Civil Procedure, the Court dismissed Benin’s claim that the arbitral tribunal had lacked jurisdiction because the parties’ contract had been previously annulled by a Benin court. The Court referred to the substantive rule of international arbitration that an arbitration agreement is juridically independent from the main contract. Here, the validity of the arbitration clause itself was not disputed. As to the further argument that exequatur would be in violation of the international public policy principle of res judicata, the Court reasoned that in order for an award to be irreconcilable with a foreign court decision – in which case French international public policy may be affected – both decisions must be enforceable in France. In the present case, Benin had not requested exequatur of any of the Benin or Burkina Faso court decisions.

    Cour d’Appel, Paris, Chambre commerciale internationale, Pole 5 – Chamber 16, 11 January 2022, Case No. RG 20/17923

    (Republic of Benin v. SGS - SOCIETE GENERALE DE SURVEILLANCE SA)

     

    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
    FRANCE 29 September 2021 Cassation Alstom

    The Supreme Court overturned the decision of the Paris Court of Appeal, which had refused enforcement of a Swiss arbitral award on the grounds of corruption, ruling that the lower court misinterpreted the evidence. The Court agreed with the principle applied by the lower court – confirmed by a consistent line of French jurisprudence – that “sufficiently serious, precise and consistent” circumstantial evidence was needed in order to prove corruption, but rejected the lower court’s analysis of the evidence, on the circumstances of the case. The Supreme Court did not refer expressly to the New York Convention. (SEE ALSO the later decision of the Cour d’Appel of Versailles in this case, dated 14 March 2023.)

    Cour de Cassation, First Civil Chamber, 29 September 2021, No. 558 F-D

    (Alexander Brothers Ltd v. Alstom Transport and Alstom Network UK Ltd)

     

    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
    FRANCE 63 B

    The Supreme Court did not allow the appeal from a decision of the Paris Cour d'appel (FRANCE 63 A) that had granted exequatur of a CRCICA award rendered in Cairo. The lower court had correctly found that the fact that Egyptian law requires that a public entity must obtain a ministerial authorization to conclude a contract providing for arbitration was irrelevant to the determination by a French court of whether the arbitration clause is valid. The finding that the defendant had been granted sufficient time to examine certain accounts was also correct.

    Cour de Cassation, First Civil Chamber, 13 January 2021, case no. 19-22932

    (Egyptian General Petroleum Corporation – EGPC v. National Gas Company – NATGAS)

    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"
    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"
    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
    FRANCE 63 A

    The Court of Appeal granted exequatur of a CRCICA award rendered in Cairo, holding that there was a valid arbitation agreement between the parties. The Court considered that the Egyptian law requirement that a public entity obtain a ministerial authorization to conclude a contract providing for arbitration was irrelevant to the determination by a French court of whether an arbitration clause was valid. The Court also found that the defendant had been granted sufficient time to examine certain accounts submitted in the file. See also the decision of the French Supreme Court denying the appeal from this decision (FRANCE 63 B). 

    Cour d’Appel, Paris, Pole 1, Chamber 1, 21 May 2019, no. 17/19850

    (Egyptian General Petroleum Corporation – EGPC v. National Gas Company – NATGAS)

    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"
    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"
    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
    FRANCE 61

    France 61. Egyptian General Petroleum Corporation – EGPC v. NATGAS, Court of Cassation of France, First Civil Law Chamber, Petition no. 16-13.729, 1 June 2017

    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
    FRANCE 60

    France 60. Syndicat mixte des aéroports de Charente v. (1) Ryanair Limited (2) Airport Marketing Services Limited, Jurisdictional Court of France, Case no. 4075, 24 April 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
    FRANCE 59

    France 59. Weissberg srl v. Subway International BV, Cour de Cassation, 24 February 2016

    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
    FRANCE 58

    France 58. Cour de Cassation, First Civil Chamber, 8 July 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
    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
    FRANCE 57

    France 57. Cour de Cassation, First Civil Chamber, 5 November 2014

    503

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

    Burden of proof on respondent
    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"
    FRANCE 56

    France 56. Court of Cassation of France, First Civil Law Chamber, 5 March 2014

    514 Ground e: Award not binding, suspended or set aside - "Binding"
  • Excerpt Topics
    FRANCE 55

    France 55. Cour d'Appel, Paris, 19 February 2013

    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
    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"
    FRANCE 54

    France 54. Cour d'Appel, Paris, 15 January 2013

    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
    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
    FRANCE 53

    France 53. Cour de Cassation, First Civil Law Chamber, 28 March 2012

    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
    FRANCE 52

    France 52. Cour de Cassation, First Civil Law Chamber, 26 October 2011

    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
    FRANCE 51

    France 51. Cour de Cassation, First Civil Law Chamber, 6 July 2011

    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
  • Excerpt Topics
    FRANCE 50

    France 50. Cour d'Appel, Paris, First Chamber, 18 November 2010

    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
  • Excerpt Topics
    FRANCE 49

    France 49. Cour de Cassation, First Civil Chamber, 8 July 2009

    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
    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
    505 Incapacity of party
    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
    FRANCE 48

    France 48. Cour de Cassation, First Civil Chamber, 6 May 2009

    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
    509

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

    "Proper notice"
    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
  • Excerpt Topics
    FRANCE 47

    France 47. Cour de Cassation, First Civil Chamber, 4 June 2008

    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
    FRANCE 46

    France 46. Cour d'Appel, Aix-en-Provence, 12 February 2008

    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
    FRANCE 45

    France 45. Cour d'Appel, Paris, 17 January 2008

    508 Ground b: Violation of due process in general
    512 Ground c: Excess by arbitrator of his authority - Excess of authority
    FRANCE 44

    France 44. Cour d'Appel, Paris, 10 January 2008

    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
    508 Ground b: Violation of due process in general
    513 Ground d: Irregularity in the composition of the arbitral tribunal or arbitral procedure
    518

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

    Paragraph 2 - Distinction domestic-international public policy
    521

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

    Lack of impartiality of arbitrator
    524

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

    Other cases
    FRANCE 43

    France 43. Cour de Cassation, First Civil Chamber, 9 January 2008

    217

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

    Referral to arbitration in general
    222

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

    Arbitrator's competence and separability of the arbitration clause
  • Excerpt Topics
    FRANCE 42

    France 42. Cour de Cassation, First Civil Chamber, 29 June 2007

    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"
    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
    FRANCE 41

    France 41. Cour d'Appel, Paris, 18 January 2007

    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"
    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
    FRANCE 40

    France 40. Cour de Cassation, First Civil Chamber, 21 November 2006

    209 Incorporation by reference and standard conditions
    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
    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
    FRANCE 37

    France 37. Cour d'Appel, Paris, 15 June 2006

    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.
    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)
    704(B) Bilateral Treaties
    704(C) Art. VII(1): European Union (Treaties and Legislation)
    FRANCE 39

    France 39. Cour de Cassation, First Civil Chamber, 7 June 2006

    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)
    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
    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
    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
    FRANCE 38

    France 38. Cour d'Appel, Paris, First Chamber, 23 March 2006

    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
    508 Ground b: Violation of due process in general
    512 Ground c: Excess by arbitrator of his authority - Excess of authority
  • Excerpt Topics
    FRANCE 36

    France 36. Cour d'Appel, Paris, 29 September 2005

    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"
    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
  • Excerpt Topics
    FRANCE 35

    France 35. Cour d'Appel, Paris, 10 June 2004

    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
    505 Incapacity of party
    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
    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"
    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"
    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
    FRANCE 34

    France 34. Cour d'Appel, Paris, 4 December 2002

    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.
    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
  • Excerpt Topics
    FRANCE 33

    France 33. Cour d'Appel, Paris, 28 June 2001

    114

    The court discusses whether awards rendered by the Iran-US Claims Tribunal fall under the Convention.

    Iran-US Claims Tribunal
    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
    FRANCE 32

    France 32. Cour d'Appel, Paris, 22 March 2001

    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
    FRANCE 31

    France 31. Cour de Cassation, 17 October 2000

    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)
    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"
    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
  • Excerpt Topics
    FRANCE 30

    France 30. Cour de Cassation, 24 March 1998

    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
    FRANCE 28

    France 28. Cour d'Appel, Paris, 23 October 1997

    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"
    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"
    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
    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
    FRANCE 27

    France 27. Cour de Cassation, 10 June 1997

    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"
    FRANCE 26

    France 26. Cour d'Appel, Paris, 14 January 1997

    104

    The court discusses whether the Convention applies to domestic arbitration and to proceedings for the setting aside of domestic awards. 

    Convention's applicability in other cases
    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
    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
    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
    FRANCE 29

    France 29. Cour d'Appel, Paris, 22 September 1995

    104

    The court discusses whether the Convention applies to domestic arbitration and to proceedings for the setting aside of domestic awards. 

    Convention's applicability in other cases
    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))
    FRANCE 24

    France 24. Cour d'Appel, Versailles, 29 June 1995

    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
    FRANCE 23

    France 23. Cour de Cassation, 23 March 1994

    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"
    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
    FRANCE 25

    France 25. Cour d'Appel, Paris, 24 February 1994

    104

    The court discusses whether the Convention applies to domestic arbitration and to proceedings for the setting aside of domestic awards. 

    Convention's applicability in other cases
    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)
    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
    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
    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"
    518

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

    Paragraph 2 - Distinction domestic-international public policy
    521

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

    Lack of impartiality of arbitrator
    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
    704(B) Bilateral Treaties
  • Excerpt Topics
    FRANCE 22

    France 22. Cour de Cassation, 9 November 1993

    207

    The court discusses what more recent means of communication are also covered by the “exchange of letters or telegrams” alternative: telefax, email, e-commerce, etc.

    Means of communication for achieving the exchange in writing
    209 Incorporation by reference and standard conditions
    FRANCE 21

    France 21. Cour d'Appel, Grenoble, 13 September 1993

    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)
    FRANCE 20

    France 20. Cour de Cassation, 10 March 1993

    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"
    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
    FRANCE 19

    France 19. Cour d'Appel, Paris, 12 February 1993

    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
    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
    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
    FRANCE 18

    France 18. Cour d'Appel, Paris, 19 December 1991

    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"
    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
    FRANCE 17

    France 17. Cour d'Appel, Versailles, 23 January 1991

    104

    The court discusses whether the Convention applies to domestic arbitration and to proceedings for the setting aside of domestic awards. 

    Convention's applicability in other cases
    209 Incorporation by reference and standard conditions
  • Excerpt Topics
    FRANCE 16

    France 16. Tribunal de Grande Instance, Paris, 22 November 1989

    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
    FRANCE 14

    France 14. Cour de Cassation, 11 October 1989

    104

    The court discusses whether the Convention applies to domestic arbitration and to proceedings for the setting aside of domestic awards. 

    Convention's applicability in other cases
    209 Incorporation by reference and standard conditions
  • Excerpt Topics
    FRANCE 15

    France 15. Cour d'Appel, Paris, 8 December 1988

    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
    227

    Multi-party disputes: The court discusses whether related court proceedings may absorb (by vis atractiva) arbitration proceedings.

    Concurrent court proceedings ("indivisibility")
  • Excerpt Topics
    FRANCE 13

    France 13. Cour de Cassation, 5 May 1987

    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"
    FRANCE 12

    France 12. Cour d'Appel, Paris, 20 January 1987

    104

    The court discusses whether the Convention applies to domestic arbitration and to proceedings for the setting aside of domestic awards. 

    Convention's applicability in other cases
    203-204 Formal validity, uniform law and municipal law
    207

    The court discusses what more recent means of communication are also covered by the “exchange of letters or telegrams” alternative: telefax, email, e-commerce, etc.

    Means of communication for achieving the exchange in writing
    209 Incorporation by reference and standard conditions
  • Excerpt Topics
    FRANCE 11

    France 11. Cour de Cassation, Commercial Chamber, 25 February 1986

    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
    209 Incorporation by reference and standard conditions
    704

    More-favorable right provision: The court discusses the application of the 1961 European Convention together with the New York Convention, and the relationship between the two treaties.

    European Convention of 1961
  • Excerpt Topics
    FRANCE 10

    France 10. Cour d'Appel, Paris, 20 December 1984

    109

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

    Arbitral award: "a-national" 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"
    FRANCE 8

    France 8. Cour d'Appel, Rouen, First and Second Civil Chambers, 13 November 1984

    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
    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
    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
    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"
    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
    704

    More-favorable right provision: The court discusses the application of the 1961 European Convention together with the New York Convention, and the relationship between the two treaties.

    European Convention of 1961
    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
    FRANCE 7 B

    See also Cour d’Appel, Paris, 19 November 1982 (Pabalk Ticaret Ltd. Sirketi v. Norsolor SA) FRANCE 7 A

    Cour de Cassation, 9 October 1984 

    (Pabalk Ticaret Ltd. Sirketi v. Norsolor SA)

    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
    307

    The court discusses questions relating to interest on the amount due under the arbitral award, including whether the enforcement court may grant interest not granted in the award, modify interest granted in the award, and grant post-award interest.

    Interest on 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"
    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
    704

    More-favorable right provision: The court discusses the application of the 1961 European Convention together with the New York Convention, and the relationship between the two treaties.

    European Convention of 1961
  • Excerpt Topics
    FRANCE 9

    France 9. Cour de Cassation, First Civil Chamber, 25 May 1983

    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)
    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
    FRANCE 7 A

    See also Cour de Cassation, 9 October 1984 (Pabalk Ticaret Ltd. Sirketi v. Norsolor SA) FRANCE 7 B

    Cour d’Appel, Paris, 19 November 1982

    (Pabalk Ticaret Ltd. Sirketi v. Norsolor SA)

    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
    307

    The court discusses questions relating to interest on the amount due under the arbitral award, including whether the enforcement court may grant interest not granted in the award, modify interest granted in the award, and grant post-award interest.

    Interest on 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"
    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
    704

    More-favorable right provision: The court discusses the application of the 1961 European Convention together with the New York Convention, and the relationship between the two treaties.

    European Convention of 1961
  • Excerpt Topics
    FRANCE 5

    France 5. Cour d'Appel, Paris, First Supplementary Chamber, 15 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)
    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
    FRANCE 6

    France 6. Cour d'Appel, Reims, Civil Chamber, 23 July 1981

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

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

    Paragraph 2 - Distinction domestic-international public policy
    521

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

    Lack of impartiality of arbitrator
    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
    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
    FRANCE 4

    France 4. Cour d'Appel, Paris, First Supplementary Chamber, 20 June 1980

    107

    The court discusses the relevance and determination of the commercial nature of the relationship underlying the award, including in the context of contractual and non-contractual relations.

    Second reservation ("commercial reservation") (paragraph 3)
    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"
    FRANCE 3

    France 3. Cour d'Appel, Paris, First Chamber, 21 February 1980

    109

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

    Arbitral award: "a-national" award
  • Excerpt Topics
    FRANCE 1 B

    See also Président, Tribunal de Grande Instance, Paris, 15 May 1970 (Compagnie de St. Gobain – Point à Mousson v. The Fertilizer Company of India, Ltd.) FRANCE 1 A

    Cour d’Appel, Paris, 10 May 1971 (Compagnie de St. Gobain – Point à Mousson v. The Fertilizer Company of India, Ltd.)

    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
    503

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

    Burden of proof on respondent
    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"
    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
    FRANCE 2

    France 2. Tribunal de Grande Instance, Strasbourg, 9 October 1970

    209 Incorporation by reference and standard conditions
    404

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

    Authentication and certification
    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"
    FRANCE 1 A

    See also Cour d’Appel, Paris, 10 May 1971 (Compagnie de St. Gobain – Point à Mousson v. The Fertilizer Company of India, Ltd.)  FRANCE 1 B

    Président, Tribunal de Grande Instance, Paris, 15 May 1970

    (Compagnie de St. Gobain – Point à Mousson v. The Fertilizer Company of India, Ltd.)

    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
    503

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

    Burden of proof on respondent
    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"
    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