GEORGIA Law and Practice Contributed by: Lasha Nodia, Giorgi Kekenadze and Ani Akophashvili, Nodia, Urumashvili and Partners
12.2 Enforcement Procedure In Georgia, second-instance (appellate) courts have jurisdiction over the recognition and enforcement of domestic arbitral awards. The Supreme Court of Geor - gia, as the third-instance court, is authorised to hear cases concerning the recognition and enforcement of international arbitral awards. A party seeking the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award must submit either the duly certi - fied original of the arbitral award (for awards rendered outside the territory of Georgia) or its duly certified copy, as well as the original or a duly certified copy of the arbitration agreement (if such exists). If the arbi - tral award or the arbitration agreement is not in the Georgian language, the party must also submit a duly certified Georgian translation of these documents. In recent years, courts have adopted an arbitration- friendly approach in various instances. By way of example, the Supreme Court of Georgia has found that an arbitration agreement providing that parties “may” refer a dispute to arbitration was enforceable. However, there have been instances where courts have evaluated arbitration agreements governed by foreign law through the lens of Georgian legal princi - ples, potentially leading to inconsistent interpretation and application. The award that has been set aside by the courts in the seat of arbitration may be refused recognition and enforcement in Georgia. As per the Law of Georgia on Arbitration, a court may refuse enforcement of a foreign arbitral award if it has been set aside or sus - pended by a court of the country in which ‒ or under the law of which ‒ the award was made. However, courts have not developed a decisive practice in this regard, mainly owing to the rarity of such motions. When an arbitral award is subject to ongoing set-aside proceedings at the seat, this does not automatically result in the suspension of enforcement proceedings in Georgia. However, the court may ‒ upon a party’s motion ‒ consider whether to suspend the enforce - ment proceedings pending the outcome of the annul - ment proceedings. The decision to suspend is dis - cretionary and assessed on a case-by-case basis by the court.
As for the defence of sovereign immunity, Georgian courts have so far not addressed this issue. 12.3 Approach of the Courts Georgian courts have a pro-enforcement approach towards both foreign and domestic arbitral awards, in line with Georgia being a signatory of the New York Convention. Moreover, as mentioned in 11.3 Stand- ard of Judicial Review , Georgian courts frequently emphasise that “when reviewing a claim to annul an arbitral award, the court does not examine the merits of the case, determine the factual circumstances, or assess the evidence” ‒ thereby reinforcing the princi - ple of minimal judicial interference in arbitral proceed - ings. However, when it comes to consumer arbitration or arbitration involving a natural person, courts tend to derogate from the above-mentioned principle and apply stricter standards, both in terms of the arbitra - tion agreement’s content (demanding clear and unam - biguous consent) and its form. A foreign or domestic arbitral award will be enforced and recognised unless a ground of refusal is proven by the party opposing enforcement. These grounds include the absence of a valid arbitration agreement, violation of due process, non-arbitrability of the sub - ject matter, or that enforcement would be contrary to public policy. Georgian courts are able to refuse recognition or enforcement of an arbitral award when, in the view of a court, recognition or enforcement would be against the public policy of Georgia. Thus the analysis is con - ducted through the lens of domestic legal principles and not with reference to international public policy. When determining whether an award contravenes Georgian public policy, courts limit their interpretation of public policy to situations involving fundamental principles of law ‒ for example, violations of due pro - cess, corruption, fraud, or awards that seriously con - flict with the core values of the Georgian legal system or international legal standards such as the principle of proportionality.
261 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook