Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitration Awards and the Brussels Convention

Abstract

THIS ARTICLE is divided into six sections. The first section deals with the two reasons for excluding the enforcement of awards from the scope of the Brussels Convention. The second section examines the international effects of a formal order of a court giving an award executory force. The third section deals with the enforcement and recognition of foreign judgments entered on awards. The fourth section concerns the suspension of the enforcement of an award and the revocation of a judgment ordering the enforcement of an award. The fifth section examines the appeal of an award, the sixth section deals with the setting aside of an award. The ensuing discussion is based principally on the law of the Member States of the European Union (and of other States when this is of practical relevance). Both textual and policy arguments exclude arbitral awards from the scope of Title III of the Brussels Convention on Recognition and Enforcement. On its face, the title of the Brussels Convention ‘on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters’ excludes the enforcement of awards. The issue turns on the word ‘judgment’ in Article 25: > For the purposes of this Convention, ‘judgment’ means any judgment given by a court or tribunal of a Contracting State, whatever the judgment may be called, including a decree, order decision or writ of execution, as well as the determination of costs or expenses by an officer of the court. The definition of judgment for recognition and enforcement purposes provided in Article 25 of the Convention embraces decisions that correspond to the requirements of the Convention irrespective of what they are called in the legislation of the Contracting States.1 The broad meaning given to the concept of ‘judgment’ in Article 25 is consistent with the Brussels Convention's aim …