LUXEMBOURG Law and Practice Contributed by: Elisabeth Omes, Stephen De Ron and Lorenzo Cappelli, Elvinger Hoss Prussen
Enforcement of the award in Luxembourg may be obtained through a straightforward exequatur proce - dure, described below. Domestic Awards Where an award is rendered in Luxembourg, enforce - ment requires an exequatur granted by the president of the competent District Court. The application is generally determined ex parte, meaning that no other party is heard at this stage. An order granting exequatur is not itself subject appeal. However, it may be challenged, together with the arbitral award, by means of an application for annulment. By contrast, an order refusing exequatur may be appealed. The other party or parties to the arbitration must be summoned before the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal will determine both the appeal against the exequatur order and the application for annulment, unless the time limit for launching annulment proceed - ings has expired. International Awards Where the seat of arbitration is outside the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, the exequatur must generally be sought before the President of the District Court where the debtor is domiciled, or, if the debtor is not domiciled in Luxembourg, where enforcement is sought. An order granting or refusing exequatur may be chal - lenged by either party within one month of service of the order. In exceptional circumstances – eg, where the order was obtained by fraud or where new evi- dence subsequently comes to light, the order may also be revised. 4.3 Categories of Arbitral Awards Not Enforced There are only limited circumstances in which enforce - ment may be refused. The courts will not refuse enforcement merely because they disagree with the arbitral tribunal’s findings of fact or conclusions of law. However, jurisdictional and procedural irregularities
can lead to the refusal of enforcement. The principal limitation on the recognition or enforcement of arbitral awards is that the arbitral award must not be mani- festly contrary to public policy. Under Article 1234 of the NCPC, the exequatur may be refused where the award is manifestly affected by one of the grounds for annulment set out in Article 1238 of the NCPC. These grounds include: • the arbitral tribunal wrongly declaring itself compe - tent or incompetent; • the arbitral tribunal being irregularly constituted; • the arbitral tribunal ruling without conforming to the mission entrusted to it; • the award being contrary to public policy; • the award not being reasoned, unless the par - ties have exempted the arbitrators from providing reasons; or • violation of the rights of defence. A revision leading to the withdrawal of the award can also be sought if: • the award was obtained by fraud; • decisive evidence was concealed during arbitration later emerges; • the award was based on forged documents; or • false testimony or false statements materially affected the award. The grounds for setting aside an arbitral award in Lux - embourg are broadly similar to those applicable under French law. For international awards, the Court of appeal may refuse to grant an exequatur if: • the arbitral tribunal wrongly declared itself compe - tent or incompetent; • the arbitral tribunal was irregularly constituted; • the arbitral tribunal ruled without conforming to the mission entrusted to it; • the award was contrary to public policy; • the award was not reasoned, unless the parties have exempted the arbitrators from providing reasons; • there has been a violation of the rights of defence;
291 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook