French fisherman Loic Fontaine said he plans to sell his boat because, cut off after Brexit from access to British waters where French fleets traditionally fished, the vessel cannot earn its keep.
Introduction
France is an arbitration-friendly jurisdiction with a positive attitude towards enforcement of international arbitral awards. The enactment of Decree 2011-48 of 13 January 2011, which reformed French arbitration law, reinforced this positive approach.
One of the major innovations of Decree 2011-48 was Article 1526 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC). Pursuant to said article, a motion to set aside an international arbitral award or an appeal against an order granting such award s enforcement (
exequatur) no longer leads to an automatic stay of execution of the international arbitral award.
However, this innovation is accompanied by an important safeguard: if the international award s enforcement is likely to severely harm the rights of one of the parties, the first president of the court of appeal ruling in expedite proceedings or the pre-trial judge overseeing the case, once appointed, may stay or amend the award s enforcement (Article 1526(2)).(1)
Enforcing arbitral awards against States or State Entities
Summary: The article underlines the challenges parties might face when seeking to enforce and execute arbitral awards against States or State entities. Whilst Foreign States in most jurisdictions, are granted certain immunities when proceedings are brought against the State before courts of another State, in this article we highlight the limits of such immunity. Another crucial argument that might be brought up by States, is that the State entity party to an arbitration agreement, did not have the power to arbitrate on behalf of the State. Additionally, there are a number of procedural formalities parties might face when seeking for enforcement, including limitation periods for enforcing awards discussed in this article.