Brazil / 28 August 2007 / Brazil, Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo (Court of Justice of São Paulo) / First Brands do Brasil Ltda. and Other v STP – Petroplus Produtos Automotivos S/A PPA and Others / Interlocutory Appeal 518.393-4/9-00
| Country | Brazil |
| Court | Brazil, Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo (Court of Justice of São Paulo) |
| Date | 28 August 2007 |
| Parties | First Brands do Brasil Ltda. and Other v STP – Petroplus Produtos Automotivos S/A PPA and Others |
| Case number | Interlocutory Appeal 518.393-4/9-00 |
| Source |
http://www.tjsp.jus.br (Official website of the Tribunal de Justiça do Estado de São Paulo) |
| Languages | Portuguese |
| Summary | In a previous proceeding, the Superior Tribunal de Justiça had granted recognition and enforcement to the award in which an arbitral tribunal had found in favour of First Brands do Brasil Ltda. (First Brands) and other. In the current dispute before the Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo (São Paulo Court of Appeals) Petroplus Produtos Automotivos S/A and others sought to declare the nullity of the arbitral award. The Court of First Instance rejected First Brands argument that the claim be dismissed without prejudice because the Superior Tribunal de Justiça had already granted recognition and enforcement to the award. Thus, First Brands filed an Interlocutory Appeal before the Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo seeking an order that it was not possible to challenge the validity of an award after it was granted recognition and enforcement by the Superior Tribunal de Justiça. The Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo dismissed the appeal based on the Brazilian Arbitration Act (the Arbitration Act) allowing the challenge proceedings to continue before the Brazilian courts. It stated that recognition and enforcement proceedings did not review the content of the arbitral award. Thus, the Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo found that the Superior Tribunal de Justiça only analyzes the award on the criteria laid down in Article 38 and 39 of the Arbitration Act (which mirror Article V(1)(2) NYC). Therefore, according to the Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo the Superior Tribunal de Justiça has no competence to decide on the nullity of the arbitral award based on Article 32 of the Arbitration Act unless the criteria outlined in both provisions are the same. The Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo considered that possible objections dealing with the recognition and enforcement of the foreign award were not the same as the ones to declare a nullity of an award. Thus, this demonstrated that they had different content despite eventually having some overlapping provisions allowing the same objections in both proceedings. Therefore, the interlocutory appeal to dismiss the claims without prejudice was dismissed and the proceedings for setting aside the award continued. |
| affirmed by : | |
| see also : |
|
Attachment (1)
 Original Language Adobe Acrobat PDF |
