Country
|
China
|
Court
|
China, 广东省江门市中级人民法院 (Guangdong, Jiangmen Intermediate People’s Court)
|
Date
|
10 December 2003
|
Parties
|
Aiba Ipsen Industries Co., Ltd. v. Taili Electric Appliance (Jiangmen) Co., Ltd.
|
Case number
|
[2002] 江中法经初字第398号 / [2002] JiangZhongFaJingChuZi No. 398
|
Applicable NYC Provisions
|
IV
|
V
|
V(1)(b)
|
Languages
|
English
|
Summary
|
A contractual dispute arose between Aiba Ipsen Industries Co., Ltd. ("Ipsen") and Taili Electric Appliance (Jiangmen) Co., Ltd. (“Taili”). The dispute was referred to the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (“SCC”). On 4 May 2001, an award was rendered in favour of Ipsen, who then applied for enforcement and recognition on 17 May and 23 October, respectively before the Jiangmen Intermediate People’s Court (江门市中级人民法院) after no party challenged the arbitral award within the three-month period following the issuance of the award.
The Jiangmen Intermediate People’s Court opined that the award should be recognised and enforced. In particular, the court determined that the NYC was applicable to recognition and enforcement as well as certain provisions of Chinese law. The court also found that the application for recognition and enforcement had complied with the submission requirements set out in Article IV NYC, namely that Ipsen had submitted copies of the arbitral award, the parties’ contract and corresponding Chinese translations that had been authenticated by the Chinese embassy, and that there were no grounds for refusing recognition or enforcement of the arbitral award according to Article V(1)(b) NYC.
|
Link to the record
|
https://newyorkconvention1958.org/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=1493&opac_view=6
|