France / 19 December 1991 / France, Cour d'appel de Paris / Société Hilmarton Ldt v. Société Omnium de traitement et de valorisation (OTV) / 90-16778
Country | France |
Court | France, Cour d'appel de Paris (Court of Appeal of Paris) |
Date | 19 December 1991 |
Parties | Société Hilmarton Ldt v. Société Omnium de traitement et de valorisation (OTV) |
Case number | 90-16778 |
Applicable NYC Provisions | V | V(1) | V(1)(e) | VII | VII(1) |
Source |
Original decision obtained from the registry of the Cour d’appel de Paris |
Summary | A French company (Omnium de Traitement et de Valorisation - OTV) entrusted an English company (Hilmarton) with the task of providing advise and coordination for a bid to obtain and perform a contract for works in Algeria. Hilmarton initiated an arbitration pursuant to the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) arbitration agreement in order to obtain payment of the remaining balance of its fees. The award rendered in Geneva on 19 August 1988 dismissed this claim. In an order issued on 27 February 1990, the President of the Tribunal de Grande Instance de Paris (First Instance Court of Paris) allowed the enforcement of the award in France, even though it had been set aside in Switzerland. Appealing this decision, Hilmarton argued that the recognition and enforcement of an award in France set aside in the country where it was rendered is contrary to international public policy under Article 1502 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the NYC. The Cour d'appel de Paris (Paris Court of Appeal) confirmed the enforcement order and dismissed the appeal. It reasoned that, according to Article VII NYC, the provisions of the NYC may not deprive a party of any right it may have to avail itself of an arbitral award in the manner and to the extent allowed by the law or the treaties of the country where such award is sought to be relied upon. It thus ruled that a court may not refuse to enforce an award when its domestic law would allow it and should disregard the provision Article V(1)(e) NYC where the domestic law of the country where enforcement is sought would allow it. It then noted that the annulment of an award in the country where it was rendered does not constitute a ground for refusing enforcement listed under Article 1502 of the Code of Civil Procedure. As a result, the Cour d'appel de Paris held that, pursuant to Article VII NYC, OTV is entitled to avail itself of French rules on international arbitration in order to request the enforcement of the award in France and that, given that French law on international arbitration does not require French courts to take into consideration the decision to set aside the award in a foreign legal order, the incorporation in the French legal order of an international award set aside abroad is not contrary to international public policy under Article 1502 5° of the Code of Civil Procedure. |
affirmed by : |
Attachment (1)
Original Language Adobe Acrobat PDF |