Linked authorities :
|
Available documents (15)
sorted by (Publication date descending, Resource ascending) Add to selection
Quick view
Refine your search
Adama Zoromé / Analyse de l'article 34 de l'Acte uniforme sur le droit de l'arbitrage à l'aune des conventions portant sur la reconnaissance et l'exécution des sentences arbitrales internationales / 29 Lexbase Afrique-Ohada (2019) - 16/01/2020
Author(s) Adama Zoromé Source 29 Lexbase Afrique-Ohada (2019) Subject(s) B. Articles on the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards in specific countries and regions (including book chapters) Jurisdictions OHADA Link to the record https://newyorkconvention1958.org/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=6269&opac_view=6 Senegal / 20 December 2017 / Senegal, Cour suprême (Supreme Court) / Bocar Samba Dieye v. Ascot Commodities SA / J/108/RG/17
Country Senegal | OHADA Court Senegal, Cour suprême (Supreme Court) Date 20 December 2017 Parties Bocar Samba Dieye v. Ascot Commodities SA Case number J/108/RG/17 Applicable NYC Provisions III | IV | V Source Registry of the Court
Languages French reverses : see also : Link to the record https://newyorkconvention1958.org/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=5230&opac_view=6 Attachment (1)
Original LanguageAdobe Acrobat PDFAlexander T. Brabant ; Maxime Desplats ; Ophélie Divoy / L'exequatur des sentences arbitrales étrangères au sein de l'espace OHADA : l'Acte uniforme relatif au droit de l'arbitrage suscite toujours bien des questions (première partie) / 6 Lexbase Afrique-Ohada 2017 - 13/12/2017
Author(s) Alexander T. Brabant ; Maxime Desplats ; Ophélie Divoy Source 6 Lexbase Afrique-Ohada 2017 Subject(s) B. Articles on the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards in specific countries and regions (including book chapters) Jurisdictions OHADA Link to the record https://newyorkconvention1958.org/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=6278&opac_view=6 Senegal / 15 December 2016 / Senegal, Cour d’appel de Dakar (Court of Appeal of Dakar) / Bocar Samba Dieye v. Ascot Commodities SA
Country Senegal | OHADA Court Senegal, Cour d’appel de Dakar (Court of Appeal of Dakar) Date 15 December 2016 Parties Bocar Samba Dieye v. Ascot Commodities SA Applicable NYC Provisions III Source Registry of the Court
Languages French reversed by : see also : Link to the record https://newyorkconvention1958.org/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=5229&opac_view=6 Attachment (1)
Original LanguageAdobe Acrobat PDFSenegal / 25 January 2016 / Senegal, Tribunal Régional Hors Classe de Dakar (Special Regional Court of Dakar) / Ascot Commodities SA v. Bocar Samba Dieye
Country Senegal | OHADA Court Senegal, Tribunal Régional Hors Classe de Dakar (Special Regional Court of Dakar) Date 25 January 2016 Parties Ascot Commodities SA v. Bocar Samba Dieye Applicable NYC Provisions II | II(2) | III | IV | V | V(2) Source Registry of the Court
Languages French see also : Link to the record https://newyorkconvention1958.org/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=5228&opac_view=6 Attachment (1)
Original LanguageAdobe Acrobat PDFGaston Kenfack Douajni / L’Arbitrage CCJA comme Modèle pour l’Elaboration d’un Instrument Universel en vue d’une Meilleure Circulation Internationale des Sentences / 4 Journal du Droit International, Octobre 2013 - 2013
Author(s) Gaston Kenfack Douajni Source 4 Journal du Droit International, Octobre 2013 Subject(s) B. Articles on the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards in specific countries and regions (including book chapters) Jurisdictions OHADA Worldcat Number Worldcat : 869461576 ISBN 978-90-04-28435-7 Link to the record https://newyorkconvention1958.org/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=3108&opac_view=6 Jean-Marie Tchakoua / L’Execution des Sentences Arbitrales dans l’Espace OHADA: Regard sur unce Construction Inachevée à Partir du Cadre Camerounais / 6(1) Revue Africaine des Sciences Juridiques 1 (2009) - 2009
Author(s) Jean-Marie Tchakoua Source 6(1) Revue Africaine des Sciences Juridiques 1 (2009) Subject(s) B. Articles on the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards in specific countries and regions (including book chapters) Jurisdictions Cameroon | OHADA Worldcat Number Worldcat : 894425440 ISBN 978-3-642-04885-2 Link to the record https://newyorkconvention1958.org/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=2960&opac_view=6 Côte d'Ivoire / 20 April 2004 / Côte d'Ivoire, Cour d'appel d'Abidjan / Société PRODEXCI v Société RAIMUND COMMODITIES INC. / Arrêt n° 486
Country Côte d'Ivoire | OHADA Court Côte d'Ivoire, Cour d'appel d'Abidjan Date 20 April 2004 Parties Société PRODEXCI v Société RAIMUND COMMODITIES INC. Case number Arrêt n° 486 Source OHADATA J-05-347, OHADATA J-08-260
Languages English Summary An agreement was entered into between a US company (RAIMUND COMMODITIES INC.) and a company registered in Côte d'Ivoire (PRODEX-CI). A dispute arose and an arbitral award was rendered by the Arbitral Chamber of the Cocoa Merchants' Association of America in favor of RAIMUND. In an order issued on 22 December 2003, the President of the Tribunal de Première Instance de Yopougon (First Instance Court of Yopougon), acting as summary judge, allowed the enforcement of the arbitral award in Côte d'Ivoire. Appealing this decision, PRODEX-CI argued that the summary judge lacked juridisction to grant the enforcement of the arbitral award pursuant to the provisions of the Code of Civil and Commercial Procedure and that the enforcement should have been refused given that due process had been violated. In response, RAIMUND contended that the Tribunal de Première Instance de Yopougon had jurisdiction and that the applicable texts were the Uniform Act on Arbitration and the NYC, whereas the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure did not apply to the case at hand. The Cour d'appel d'Abidjan (Abidjan Court of Appeal) overturned the enforcement order and held that the Tribunal de Première Instance lacked jurisdiction. It reasoned that even though the NYC is applicable to the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, RAIMUND had failed to establish that the Convention allowed summary judges to grant enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Côte d'Ivoire. It thus ruled that the enforcement of a foreign arbitral award should, in the absence of specific international treaties addressing the issue, be granted by the courts of the place where the Defendant has a domicile or residence in Côte d'Ivoire pursuant to the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure. Link to the record https://newyorkconvention1958.org/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=584&opac_view=6 Attachment (1)
Original LanguageAdobe Acrobat PDFGaston Kenfack Douajni / The Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in OHADA Member States / 19(1) Journal of International Arbitration 55 (2003) - 2003
Author(s) Gaston Kenfack Douajni Source 19(1) Journal of International Arbitration 55 (2003) Subject(s) B. Articles on the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards in specific countries and regions (including book chapters) Jurisdictions OHADA Worldcat Number Worldcat : 773487815 ISBN 978-90-04-28435-7 Link to the record https://newyorkconvention1958.org/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=3107&opac_view=6 Côte d'Ivoire / 13 June 2002 / Côte d'Ivoire, Cour Suprême / Société SICAFA S.A. v Société J. ARON and Company (U.K.) / Arrêt n° 501
Country Côte d'Ivoire | OHADA Court Côte d'Ivoire, Cour Suprême Date 13 June 2002 Parties Société SICAFA S.A. v Société J. ARON and Company (U.K.) Case number Arrêt n° 501 Source OHADATA J-08-271 OHADATA J-09-289
Languages English Summary An arbitral award was rendered on 26 July 1996 under the aegis of the Chambre des Cafés et Poivres du Havre in favor of a UK company (J. ARON and Company). In an order issued on 7 February 1997, the Tribunal de Grande Instance du Havre (First Instance Court of Le Havre) allowed enforcement of the arbitral award in France. On 17 February 1998, the enforcement order was declared enforceable in Côte d'Ivoire by the President of the Tribunal de Première Instance d'Abidjan (First Instance Court of Abidjan). The losing party (Société Industrielle de Café et de Cacao) filed a petition before the Cour Suprême (Supreme Court) on the ground that this decision violated the France-Côte d'Ivoire Convention on judicial cooperation and the provisions of the NYC. The Cour Suprême affirmed this decision and dismissed the action, without referring to the NYC. It reasoned that the France-Côte d'Ivoire Convention on judicial cooperation sets forth the conditions that must be satisfied for a decision rendered by French Courts to be declared enforceable in Côte d'Ivoire, inter alia, that (i) the decision was rendered by a court having jurisdiction, (ii) the decision is enforceable under French law, (iii) due process was not violated, and that (iv) the decision is not contrary to the public policy of the country in which it is relied upon. It then held that SICAFA had not established that these conditions were not fulfilled in the case at hand. Link to the record https://newyorkconvention1958.org/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=583&opac_view=6 Attachment (1)
Original LanguageAdobe Acrobat PDFCameroon / 15 May 2002 / Cameroon, High Court of Fako Division / African Petroleum Consultants (APC) v Société Nationale de Raffinage / Suit No. HCF/91/M/2001-2002
Country Cameroon | OHADA Court Cameroon, High Court of Fako Division Date 15 May 2002 Parties African Petroleum Consultants (APC) v Société Nationale de Raffinage Case number Suit No. HCF/91/M/2001-2002 Applicable NYC Provisions I | III | IV | IV(1) Source OHADATA J-02-177
Languages English Summary An award was rendered on 17 April 2002 in London in favor of African Petroleum Consultants (APC). APC petitioned the High Court of Fako Division to enforce the arbitral award in Cameroon pursuant to the NYC, the Charter of Investment in Cameroon and the OHADA Uniform Act on Arbitration. The losing party (Société Nationale de Raffinage) opposed this request by claiming that the High Court of Fako Division lacked jurisdiction. The High Court of Fako Division granted enforcement of the award in Cameroon. It first assessed whether it had jurisdiction to grant the enforcement of the arbitral award. Pursuant to Articles I and III NYC, it reasoned that given the fact that Cameroon had ratified the NYC, it was bound to recognize and enforce arbitral awards made in another Contracting State (which was the case here since the award was rendered in London, the United Kingdom being a party to the NYC) and to consider them binding and enforce them in accordance with the rules of procedure of Cameroon. It thus held that it had jurisdiction to entertain the request. It then ruled that there was no reason to refuse the recognition and enforcement of the award given that (i) there was no lack of capacity on the part of the Parties, (ii) the arbitration agreement was valid, (iii) proper notice was given to the Party against whom the award was made, (iv) the award fell within the terms of the submission to arbitration, and (v) the award did not contain decisions on matters beyond the scope of the submission to arbitration. Lastly, it held that APC's application satisfied the conditions set forth in Article IV NYC since the documents provided therein had been produced. see also : Link to the record https://newyorkconvention1958.org/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=543&opac_view=6 Attachment (1)
Original LanguageAdobe Acrobat PDFBurkina Faso / 13 June 2001 / Burkina Faso, Tribunal de Grande Instance de Ouagadougou / Société des Ciments d'Abidjan (SCA) v Société Burkinabè des Ciments et Matériaux (CIMAT)
Country Burkina Faso | OHADA Court Burkina Faso, Tribunal de Grande Instance de Ouagadougou Date 13 June 2001 Parties Société des Ciments d'Abidjan (SCA) v Société Burkinabè des Ciments et Matériaux (CIMAT) Applicable NYC Provisions VII | VI | V | III Source OHADATA J-03-83
Languages English Summary An ICC award was rendered in Paris on 17 August 1998 in favor of Société des Ciments d'Abidjan (SCA). The award was subsequently declared enforceable in France. SCA then requested the enforcement of the arbitral award in Burkina Faso. The losing Party (CIMAT) opposed enforcement on various grounds, inter alia, (i) that the Tribunal de Grande Instance de Ouagadougou (First Instance Court of Ouagadougou) lacked jurisdiction to rule on the matter in accordance with the France-Burkina Faso Convention on Judicial Cooperation whose provisions prevail over the NYC pursuant to Article VII NYC, (ii) that there was a situation of lis pendens since it initiated proceeding before the Tribunal de Grande Instance de Ouagadougou which was still pending before the Cour d'appel d'Abidjan (Abidjan Court of Appeal), and (iii) that the arbitral award violated Burkina public policy given that the Claimant had not complied with the Burkina procedural rules in breach of Article III NYC. It also requested an adjournment of the decision on the enforcement of the award in accordance with Article VI NYC until the French Cour de cassation (Supreme Court) rendered its decision on the setting aside of the award. The Tribunal de Grande Instance de Ouagadougou granted enforcement of the arbitral award in Burkina Faso. It first dismissed CIMAT's objection on jurisdiction which was raised at a later stage of the proceeding. It then reasoned that since Burkina Faso ratified the NYC on 23 March 1987, the NYC is applicable to the case at hand. It recalled the grounds for refusing enforcement of an arbitral award listed under Article V NYC and held that a situation of lis pendens does not constitute a ground for refusing enforcement. As to CIMAT's argument that the arbitral award violates Burkina public policy, it stated that a violation of public policy requires the breach of a general principle of law considered fundamental by the State. In the present case, the Tribunal de Grande Instance de Ouagadougou concluded that the arbitral award was not contrary to a fundamental principle of law. see also : Link to the record https://newyorkconvention1958.org/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=542&opac_view=6 Attachment (1)
Original LanguageAdobe Acrobat PDFCôte d'Ivoire / 04 December 1997 / Côte d'Ivoire, Cour Suprême / Toyota Services Afrique (TSA) v Société Promotion de Représentation Automobiles (PREMOTO) / Arrêt n°317/97
Country Côte d'Ivoire | OHADA Court Côte d'Ivoire, Cour Suprême Date 04 December 1997 Parties Toyota Services Afrique (TSA) v Société Promotion de Représentation Automobiles (PREMOTO) Case number Arrêt n°317/97 Applicable NYC Provisions II | II(3) Source OHADATA J-08-179 OHADATA J-02-84
Languages English Summary On 29 August 1996, PREMOTO and TSA concluded a commercial concession agreement containing an arbitration agreement. A dispute arose and PREMOTO initiated summary proceedings before the juge des référés (summary judge), which issued an order on 2 June 1997, ordering TSA to deliver a certain amount of vehicles. The Cour d'appel d'Abidjan (Abidjan Court of Appeal) upheld the order on 1 July 1997. TSA filed a petition before the Cour Suprême (Supreme Court) on various grounds, inter alia, that the lower courts should have referred the parties to arbitration in accordance with Article II(3) NYC. The Cour Suprême affirmed the decision of the Cour d'appel d'Abidjan. It reasoned that the juge des référés had jurisdiction to order provisional measures despite the existence of an arbitration agreement. The Cour Suprême then reviewed the decision rendered by the juge des référés and held that it had not ruled on the merits and therefore Article II(3) NYC had not been breached. It then rejected the other arguments raised by TSA and dismissed the action. see also : Link to the record https://newyorkconvention1958.org/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=541&opac_view=6 Attachment (1)
Original LanguageAdobe Acrobat PDFBenin / 25 January 1994 / Benin, Tribunal de Première Instance de Cotonou / M. Adeossi v Sonapra / Ordonnance n°19/94
Country Benin | OHADA Court Benin, Tribunal de Première Instance de Cotonou Date 25 January 1994 Parties M. Adeossi v Sonapra Case number Ordonnance n°19/94 Applicable NYC Provisions V | V(1)(b) Source OHADATA J-08-176
Languages English Summary An arbitral award was rendered in the Havre (France) on 20 December 1993. Mr. Adeossi requested the recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award in Benin. The Tribunal de Première Instance de Cotonou (Cotonou First Instance Tribunal) refused to enforce the arbitral award. It reasoned that the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards were governed by the NYC (ratified by Benin in 1974) and the Code of Civil Procedure, and verified whether the conditions provided in Article V NYC and Article 1030 of the Code of Civil Procedure were fulfilled, inter alia (i) the regularity of the foreign decision (formal requirement), (ii) whether the respondents were able to participate in the proceeding, (iii) whether the delays had been complied with, (iv) whether due process had been violated, (v) whether the arbitral tribunal had jurisdiction to hear the dispute, and (vi) whether the award was contrary to domestic public policy. In the case at hand, the Tribunal de Première Instance de Cotonou held that due process had been violated. In this respect, it noted that after the date of closing of the proceeding, both parties had filed supplemental briefs and that, although the brief submitted by SONAPRA had been declared inadmissible, the arbitral tribunal had relied on various arguments raised by Mr. Adeossi in his final brief submitted after SONAPRA's submission which had been refused. Link to the record https://newyorkconvention1958.org/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=540&opac_view=6 Attachment (1)
Original LanguageAdobe Acrobat PDF
Reservations With the exception of the Central African Republic, which has made a reciprocity reservation and a reservation for commercial relationships, none of the other OHADA Contracting States has made any reservation.
OHADA Arbitration Act in force Uniform Act on Arbitration of 11 March 1999 [Original in French | Translation in English]
Author(s) and Contributor(s) Aboubacar Fall (Fall & Partners Lawyers)
OHADA (Organisation pour l’Harmonisation en Afrique du Droit des Affaires)
Benjamin Siino (Gaillard Banifatemi Shelbaya Disputes)More information... https://newyorkconvention1958.org/index.php?lvl=cmspage&pageid=11&menu=589&opac_view=-1