URUGUAY Law and Practice Contributed by: Leonardo Melos, Bergstein Abogados
of the contract that gave rise to the dispute. Having said that, local courts are reluctant to award punitive damages, in light of the absence of a legal framework for this type of remedy. 10.3 Recovering Interest and Legal Costs According to Article 34 of the AICA, the parties are free to establish whether legal costs are reimbursed to the winning party. Unless the parties have decided otherwise in the arbitration agreement, the arbitral tri - bunal will allow the winning party to recover the legal costs. However, regarding the legal fees, a costs- sharing approach is normally followed. In cases where the losing party has not co-operated with the arbitral tribunal in the production of evidence or where the procedural conduct of the losing party has not met good-faith standards, fees and costs are imposed on the losing party. The award may only be appealed before a court by petition for annulment. In order to succeed, the party pursuing annulment should demonstrate one or more of the following: • that one of the parties to the arbitration agree - ment was affected by some incapacity or that said agreement is not valid; • that the party pursuing annulment not been duly notified of the appointment of an arbitrator or the arbitration proceedings have breached the due process of law; 11. Review of an Award 11.1 Grounds for Appeal • that the award refers to a dispute not provided for in the arbitration agreement or contains decisions that exceed the scope of the arbitration agreement; • that the members of the arbitral tribunal or the arbitral procedure have not followed the arbitration agreement in place; • that, according to Uruguayan law, the subject mat - ter of the controversy is not subject to arbitration; or • that the award is contrary to the international pub - lic order of Uruguay.
The annulment petition must be filed within three months following the date of the last notification of the award. 11.2 Excluding/Expanding the Scope of Appeal Parties cannot agree to exclude or expand the scope of the appeal or challenge under national law. 11.3 Standard of Judicial Review The judicial review on the merits of the case is a de novo standard. 12. Enforcement of an Award 12.1 New York Convention Uruguay has ratified the New York Convention without reservations. 12.2 Enforcement Procedure An arbitral award, regardless of the country in which it was issued, will be recognised as binding in Uruguay upon the filing of a written request to the competent court. The party that invokes an award or requests its enforcement must file the original award or a duly certified copy along with the original of the arbitration agreement. If the award or agreement is not written in Spanish, the party must file a sworn translation of the documents. Even where the arbitral award has been set aside by the courts in the seat of arbitra - tion, enforcement before the local courts would be admissible. A new analysis would be performed by the local court. Regarding sovereign immunity at the enforcement stage, case law has supported the thesis that rejects the general immunity of states. The national rulings are aligned with the international regulations on this mat - ter, allowing enforcement in cases where the assets or activities in question were not related to an official purpose. That is to say, assets such as embassies are excluded from enforcement; nevertheless, commercial assets can be subject to enforcement. In summary, case law suggests that immunity of the state will not be applied
884 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook