MAURITIUS Law and Practice Contributed by: André Robert, Ammar Oozeer and Deephallee Harnaran, BLC Robert & Associates
• The application should state whether the award has been complied with or the extent to which it has not been complied with. • The application should include a draft order grant - ing recognition of the award and, where appropri - ate, authorising the enforcement of the award. • The application is dealt with by the Chief Justice and, if the above requirements have been complied with, a provisional order is granted recognising the award and authorising the enforcement of the award in the same manner. The Chief Justice can specify the parties on which the order should be served. • Within 14 days after receipt of the provisional order, the applicant has to cause the enforcement claim and provisional order to be served on the respond - ent or any such parties as ordered by the Chief Justice. It is worth noting that an application can also be made to extend the delay to allow service to be effected outside the jurisdiction (Rule 8 of the 2013 Rules). • The respondent may apply to set aside the provi - sional order and enforcement claim within 14 days of receipt or within such period as specified by the order if it has been served outside the jurisdiction. The grounds on which the respondent can rely to set aside the provisional order are limited to those contained in Article V of the New York Convention. • The award only becomes enforceable once the period given to the respondent to set aside the provisional order has lapsed or, if the respondent has made an application to set aside the provi - sional order, when the respondent’s application has been finally dealt with. If an award has been set aside by the court in the seat of the arbitration, the Supreme Court still has discretion to enforce it in Mauritius. Article V(1)(e) of the New York Convention provides that the court may refuse recognition and enforcement if the respondent
When an award is subject to ongoing set-aside pro - ceedings, the court may, if it considers it proper, adjourn the decision on the enforcement of the award and may also, on the application of the party claim - ing enforcement of the award, order the other party to furnish suitable security (Article VI of the New York Convention). There is currently no specific law on state immunity at the enforcement stage or under the IAA. This question therefore remains subject to customary international law. 12.3 Approach of the Courts On the whole, the Mauritian courts have taken a pro- enforcement stance in the recognition and enforce - ment of arbitral awards. The Supreme Court in Super - Max Mauritius v Actis Consumer Grooming Products Limited 2024 SCJ 449 confirmed it is not possible to challenge the recognition and enforcement of arbi - tral awards on the basis of procedural formalities that conflict with the spirit of the New York Convention, and that fall outside the IAA and the 2013 Rules. The courts would refuse to engage anew in the mer - its of an award unless the arbitration was seated in Mauritius and the parties had expressly agreed to the Supreme Court of Mauritius having the power to hear appeals on Mauritian law. If the international arbitration is seated in Mauritius, the Supreme Court of Mauritius has the power to set aside the award under Section 39 of the IAA, based on grounds similar to those found in Article V of the New York Convention. If the international arbitration is seated outside Mauritius, the Supreme Court of Mau - ritius may refuse recognition and enforcement under Article V of the New York Convention. Some illustra - tions of the approach taken are set out below. Public Policy Betamax Ltd v State Trading Corporation 2021 UKPC 14 This case concerned an application to set aside an award on the ground that the arbitration agreement was void and the award contravened public policy. The Supreme Court held that an award that gave effect to an illegal contract was contrary to public
furnishes proof that the award: • has not yet become binding; or
• has been set aside or suspended by a competent authority of the country in which, or under the law of which, the award was made.
617 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook