Egypt / 05 June 2009 / Egypt, Cairo Court of Appeal / Mohamed Fouad Abdel Hamid Hassan v. El Sakka Professional Group Incorporation / 29/125
| Country | Egypt |
| Court | Egypt, Cairo Court of Appeal |
| Date | 05 June 2009 |
| Parties | Mohamed Fouad Abdel Hamid Hassan v. El Sakka Professional Group Incorporation |
| Case number | 29/125 |
| Languages | English |
| Summary | On 23 July 2002, Mohamed Fouad Abdel Hamid Hassan (“Mohamed Fouad”) concluded a contract with El Sakka Professional Group Incorporation (“El Sakka Group”) by which he undertook to sing in two concerts in the United States of America. The contract contained an arbitration agreement and provided for the application of the Law of the State of New York. Following Mohamed Fouad’s failure to attend the concerts, El Sakka Group initiated arbitration proceedings before the International Centre for Dispute Resolution in New York. On 28 February 2006, an arbitral award was issued, which ordered Mohamed Fouad to pay damages to El Sakka Group. On 2 July 2008, the Chairman of the Cairo Court of Appeal issued an order granting enforcement of the award. Mohamed Fouad challenged the Chairman’s order before the 7th Commercial Circuit of the Cairo Court of Appeal and requested that the enforcement of the award be suspended and the order be overruled on the grounds that the Court lacked jurisdiction to issue it and, in the alternative, because enforcement of the award should be refused. He alleged that the Egyptian Arbitration Law is not applicable to the enforcement of the award, which must be requested before the Court of First Instance pursuant to the provisions of the Code of Civil and Commercial Procedure (“Code of Procedure”). He also alleged that enforcement of the award should be refused pursuant to the NYC because he was refused a visa entry to the United States of America and was therefore unable to present his case. He further alleged that enforcement of the award should be refused pursuant to the NYC because it is contrary to Egyptian public policy. The Court of Cassation rejected the challenge and upheld the enforcement order. It reasoned that, when the NYC refers to rules of procedure, Egyptian Courts should apply the Egyptian Arbitration Law as it contains the rules of procedure applicable in arbitration. The Code of Procedure should only be applied when the Arbitration Law does not contain any applicable provisions. As the NYC refers to rules of procedure with regards to recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, Egyptian Courts should apply the Egyptian Arbitration Law in this respect. The Court added that no evidence establishes that Mohamed Fouad was unable to present his case since he would have been able to appoint an attorney to represent him before the arbitral tribunal. The Court also concluded that the arbitral award is not contrary to Egyptian public policy. |
Attachment (1)
 Original Language Adobe Acrobat PDF |
