Search for:
Category

Recognition & Enforcement

Category

Albtelecom SH.A v. Unifi Communications, Inc., No. 16 Civ. 9001 (S.D.N.Y. May 30, 2017) Petitioner initiated arbitration proceedings against Respondent for breach of a telecommunications contract. After the arbitration proceedings began, the parties entered into a settlement agreement and requested the arbitrator issue a consent award that would incorporate the settlement agreement. The arbitrator agreed. The award required Respondent to make certain payments to Petitioner in monthly installments. However, after the award issued, Respondent allegedly…

In its decision of May 2017, the Federal Supreme Court of Germany (Bundesgerichtshof) laid down a new principle for setting aside an arbitral award based on the infringement of the disclosure obligation of a tribunal-appointed expert (Decision of 02 May 2017, I ZB 1/16). The decision constitutes a change in German and Model Law case law. The Facts Claimant and Respondent (hereinafter the “Parties”) formed a consortium for the joint manufacture of trains. After 400…

In its decision of 28 September 2016,[1] the Austrian Supreme Court (“OGH”) partially set aside an arbitral award due to a violation of the procedural ordre public as the arbitral tribunal insufficiently reasoned its decision as to one request filed in the arbitral proceedings. 1. The challenged arbitral award in a nutshell Claimant (who also claimed to set aside the arbitral award) and Respondent (both in the underlying arbitration and the setting aside proceedings) were…

On April 19, the special chamber of the Brazilian Superior Court of Justice denied recognition of an arbitral award issued in the United States in favor of Abengoa against Adriano Ommeto Agricola et al. (SEC 9.412/US), involving a US$100 Million claim for breach of representations and warranties in the acquisition of a sugarcane mill in Brazil. The ground for the denial was that the law firm of the chairman of the arbitral tribunal had received…