CA-2025-000131 - [2025] EWCA Civ 928

The New York Convention

Before summarising the Judge’s reasoning, it is appropriate to set out the key provisions of the New York Convention, the Judge understandably not considering it necessary to do so in her short judgment in the circumstances in which it was delivered.

Article I of the Convention provides:

This Convention shall apply to the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards made in the territory of a State other than the State where the recognition and enforcement of such awards are sought, and arising out of differences between persons, whether physical or legal. It shall also apply to arbitral awards not considered as domestic awards in the State where their recognition and enforcement are sought.”

Article III sets out the obligation to recognise and enforce foreign arbitral awards on terms equivalent to those applying to domestic arbitral awards:

“Each Contracting State shall recognize arbitral awards as binding and enforce them in accordance with the rules of procedure of the territory where the award is relied upon, under the conditions laid down in the following articles. There shall not be imposed substantially more onerous conditions or higher fees or charges on the recognition or enforcement of arbitral awards to which this Convention applies than are imposed on the recognition or enforcement of domestic arbitral awards.”

Article V is the key provision for present purposes, setting out the grounds on which recognition and enforcement of a foreign arbitral award may be refused:

Recognition and enforcement of the award may be refused, at the request of the party against whom it is invoked, only if that party furnishes to the competent authority where the recognition and enforcement is sought, proof that:

The parties to the agreement referred to in article II were, under the law applicable to them, under some incapacity, or the said agreement is not valid under the law to which the parties have subjected it or, failing any indication thereon, under the law of the country where the award was made; or

The party against whom the award is invoked was not given proper notice of the appointment of the arbitrator or of the arbitration proceedings or was otherwise unable to present his case; or

The award deals with a difference not contemplated by or not falling within the terms of the submission to arbitration, or it contains decisions on matters beyond the scope of the submission to arbitration, provided that, if the decisions on matters submitted to arbitration can be separated from those not so submitted, that part of the award which contains decisions on matters submitted to arbitration may be recognized and enforced; or

The composition of the arbitral authority or the arbitral procedure was not in accordance with the agreement of the parties, or, failing such agreement, was not in accordance with the law of the country where the arbitration took place; or

The award has not yet become binding on the parties, or has been set aside or suspended by a competent authority of the country in which, or under the law of which, that award was made.

Recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award may also be refused if the competent authority in the country where recognition and enforcement is sought finds that:

The subject matter of the difference is not capable of settlement by arbitration under the law of that country; or

The recognition or enforcement of the award would be contrary to the public policy of that country.”

Article VI provides for the decision on recognition or enforcement to be adjourned if an application for the setting aside or suspension of the award has been made to a competent authority of the country in which, or under the law of which, that award was made. It further provides that, on the application of the party claiming enforcement, an order may be made that the other party give suitable security.