LUXEMBOURG Law and Practice Contributed by: Emilie Waty and Kloris Vjerdha, KLEYR_GRASSO
Awards of 1958, also known as the New York Con - vention, through the enactment of the Law of 20 May 1983. According to the reservation made by Luxembourg, the New York Convention applies on a reciprocal basis to the recognition and enforcement in Luxembourg of arbitral awards made in the territory of another con - tracting state. Luxembourg is also party to a plethora of similar conventions that contemplate the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards such as the European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration of 1961, the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States of 1965, also known as the Washing - ton Convention, and the Convention on Conciliation and Arbitration within the OSCE of 1992. 12.2 Enforcement Procedure Pursuant to Articles 1233 and 1245 of the NCCP, an arbitral award rendered in Luxembourg as well as one rendered in a foreign country may be enforced in Lux - embourg upon the issuance of an exequatur order granted by the President of the District Court having territorial jurisdiction over the domicile of the party against which enforcement is sought. The exequatur of domestic arbitral awards may be set aside on the basis of six specific and limited grounds enumerated in Article 1238 of the NCCP, whereas the enforcement of foreign awards may be refused on the basis of the same six grounds as well as four addi - tional grounds set out in Article 1243-1 of the NCCP, such as fraud. The order denying the enforcement of an arbitral award must be duly reasoned and may be appealed before the Luxembourg Court of Appeal. The appeal proceedings are adversarial and do not suspend the enforceability of the award except in cases where the enforcement of the award would be highly detrimental to one of the parties. In instances where the enforcement and recognition of an award do not fall within the scope of an interna - tional treaty (such as the New York Convention), the
Court of Appeal may not refuse the exequatur of an arbitral award except on one of the grounds in Article 1246 of the NCCP. For instance, a refusal may arise in cases where the arbitral award is contrary to public order or where it is revealed that the opposing party obtained the arbitral award through fraud. 12.3 Approach of the Courts Luxembourg courts consistently uphold a stance in favour of arbitration and respect the principle of arbi - tration autonomy. Accordingly, as evidenced by case law on the mat - ter, national courts will only decline to enforce arbitral awards in circumstances where there is a clear and manifest breach of public policy. 13. Miscellaneous 13.1 Class Action or Group Arbitration Class action arbitration and group arbitration are not contemplated under the Luxembourg Arbitration Law. 13.2 Ethical Codes The arbitral framework in Luxembourg does not estab - lish specific ethical codes or professional standards governing arbitral proceedings. Lawyers are nonethe - less bound by the Luxembourg Bar Association’s ethi - cal rules, which also encompass conduct in arbitration matters. 13.3 Third-Party Funding There are no specific rules under Luxembourg law excluding the possibility of third-party funding of dis - putes. In practice, third-party funding is available to the parties in the course of the arbitration proceed - ings. 13.4 Consolidation The Luxembourg Arbitration Law does not contain specific provisions regarding the consolidation of arbitral proceedings, and at the time of writing, no separate arbitral proceedings have been consolidated by a Luxembourg court.
556 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook