Arbitration Links - Linklaters
  • Topic: Challenges & Set Aside
  • Jurisdiction: France

English High Court rejects revived application to set aside order to enforce arbitral award

22 November 2018 Sadie Buls; Gráinne Hawkes, England & Wales; France

Tags

In Eastern European Engineering Ltd v Vijay Construction (Proprietary) Ltd [2018] EWHC 2713 (Comm) the English Commercial Court provided useful confirmation of the high bar to be met in an application to set aside enforcement of an international arbitration award where the award had already been unsuccessfully challenged at the seat of the arbitration.

View full article

Paris Court of Appeal sets aside ECT arbitration award

03 October 2017 Clément Fouchard, France

Tags

The French courts have had very few opportunities to rule on the setting aside of an investment treaty arbitration award. For this reason, the decision of the Paris Court of Appeal in Moldova v société Komstroy (Court d'appel de Paris, Pôle 1- Chambre 1, République de Moldavie v société Komstroy, 12 avril 2016, n°13/22531) is of great interest. It deals with the degree of control over an investment arbitration award by the French courts and the definition of the legal concept of investment in the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT).

View full article

A heightened level of review of arbitral awards in the context of money laundering allegations

11 April 2017 Johanne Brocas, Europe; France

Tags

The Paris Appeal Court has annulled an arbitral award rendered against the Kirghizstan Republic for violation of the BIT between Latvia and Kirghizstan on the ground that the enforcement of the award in France would result in allowing the investor to benefit from fraudulent money laundering activities.

View full article

“Adverse inference” doctrine endorsed by the Paris Appeal Court

11 April 2017 Pierre Duprey, Europe; France

Tags

In a decision of 28 February 2017, the Paris Appeal Court held that the IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration 2010 (the IBA Rules of Evidence) were applicable as long as the rules were agreed upon by the parties in the Procedural Order n°1.  Further, the court ruled that the tribunal was entitled to apply the adverse inference doctrine provided at Article 9(5) of the IBA Rules of Evidence.

View full article

This site uses cookies, if you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies. Click here to learn how to change your cookie settings.

Continue