ALBANIA Law and Practice Contributed by: Maksim Haxhia, Artan Hajdari and Eris Hysi, Haxhia & Hajdari Attorneys at Law
11.3 Standard of Judicial Review There is no general judicial review of the merits of an arbitral award. The Court of Appeal’s role is confined to the setting-aside grounds in Article 44 of Law No 52/2023. The court may independently examine issues that fall within those grounds, such as the validity and scope of the arbitration agreement, procedural fairness, tri - bunal composition, arbitrability and public order. It is not entitled to substitute its own assessment of the contractual dispute, reweigh evidence or correct an alleged error of law simply because it would have decided the merits differently. The statutory model is therefore one of limited judicial supervision rather than deferential merits review or de novo rehearing. This distinction is significant when drafting an annulment application: the alleged defect must be tied to a recognised statutory ground and not presented as an appeal against the tribunal’s substan - tive reasoning. Albania is a contracting state to the 1958 Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbi - tral Awards (the “New York Convention”). According to the UNCITRAL status record, Albania acceded to the Convention on 27 June 2001, and the Convention entered into force for Albania on 25 September 2001. The UNCITRAL status table does not list a reservation note for Albania. The New York Convention is expressly integrated into the current arbitration framework. Article 47 of Law No 52/2023 provides that the recognition of foreign arbitral awards is carried out in accordance with the New York Convention and the Albanian Code of Civil Procedure. The Convention is therefore the central international instrument for recognition and enforce - ment of foreign awards in Albania, alongside the rel - evant domestic procedural provisions. 12. Enforcement of an Award 12.1 New York Convention
12.2 Enforcement Procedure An award made in an arbitration seated in Albania is an executive title. Enforcement requires an enforce - ment order from the competent first-instance court under the Code of Civil Procedure. The court may refuse the order where a ground corresponding to the setting-aside grounds in Article 44 exists. If the Court of Appeal has already examined a setting-aside appli - cation, the first-instance court may not re-examine the same annulment grounds. Foreign awards are recognised under the New York Convention, the Code of Civil Procedure and Article 47 of Law No 52/2023. An award set aside or sus - pended by the competent authority at the seat may engage Article V(1)(e) of the Convention. Where set- aside or suspension proceedings are pending at the seat, Article VI permits the enforcing court to adjourn its decision and, where appropriate, require security. The Arbitration Law contains no separate comprehen - sive code of state immunity. An agreement by a state or state entity to arbitrate should not automatically be treated as a waiver of immunity from execution against every asset; enforcement must also consider the legal status and use of the assets and any appli - cable waiver or immunity rule. 12.3 Approach of the Courts The legal framework is structured to favour recogni - tion and enforcement subject to the limited refusal grounds in the New York Convention and Albanian law. Courts are not authorised to reconsider the merits of the dispute when deciding whether a foreign award should be recognised. Public order is an express refusal ground under Article 47 of Law No 52/2023 and a setting-aside ground for Albania-seated awards. The statute uses the term “public order” without creating a separate statutory definition of domestic and international public policy. In enforcement proceedings, the relevant enquiry is whether recognition or enforcement in Albania would conflict with fundamental principles protected by the Albanian legal order. The public-order exception should therefore address a serious incompatibility with those fundamental principles rather than an alleged error in the tribunal’s application of law or assess - ment of evidence. The developing case law under the
24 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook