Switzerland / 15 April 1999 / Switzerland, Cour de Justice de Genève / R S.A. v. A Ltd.
| Country | Switzerland |
| Court | Switzerland, Cour de Justice de Genève (Geneva Court of Justice) |
| Date | 15 April 1999 |
| Parties | R S.A. v. A Ltd. |
| Applicable NYC Provisions | IV | IV(1) | IV(1)(a) |
| Source |
Original decision obtained from the registry of the Cour de Justice de Genève |
| Languages | English |
| Summary | On 5 June 1996, A and R entered into a sales contract providing for arbitration pursuant to the rules of CIETAC of the China Council for the Promotion of International Trade (the “Chinese Commission for Arbitration” or “CCA”). A dispute arose between the parties and the CCA rendered an award in A’s favor. A sought to enforce the award in Switzerland by providing to the Tribunal de Première Instance of Geneva (Geneva Tribunal of First Instance) a copy of the contract, the original award in Chinese with a complete translation in French, of which the first and the last pages were sworn to be in conformity with the original. The Tribunal de Grande Instance granted enforcement of the award. R appealed and challenged enforcement on the grounds that A had not complied with Article IV NYC. It argued that A had only supplied the Tribunal de Première Instance with a non-certified copy of the main contract (containing the arbitration agreement), the original award in Chinese and a French translation of the award that was certified on the first and last pages only. The Cour de Justice de Genève (Court of Justice of Geneva) dismissed the appeal. It held that pursuant to Article 194 of the Swiss Private International Law, the NYC was applicable to the recognition and enforcement of awards rendered abroad, regardless of whether the State where the award had been rendered was a party to the NYC. The Cour de Justice stated that the formal requirements of Article IV NYC should be construed in a flexible manner. It recalled that the NYC was meant to improve recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards, and in particular, the party seeking enforcement only needed to comply with Article IV NYC, after which the burden shifts to the party opposing enforcement to prove a ground for denial of enforcement. The Cour de Justice held that the party seeking enforcement must at least provide the arbitration agreement and the arbitral award. It noted that R had admitted that A had submitted the original copy of the award and that although the translation the first and last pages of the award were certified, these were the most crucial pages since they established the identity of the parties and contained the final decision of the arbitral tribunal. |
| see also : |
Attachment (2)
 Original Language Adobe Acrobat PDF |
Unofficial Translation Adobe Acrobat PDF |
