GREECE Trends and Developments Contributed by: Dimitris Babiniotis, Zepos & Yannopoulos
Enforcement of Judgments and Arbitral Awards in Recent Greek Judicial Decisions and Legislative Reforms Greece has witnessed significant judicial and legisla - tive activity concerning the enforcement and recog - nition of arbitral awards and judgments. This article explores key judicial decisions and the recent enact - ment of Law 5016/2023, which reshapes the landscape of international commercial arbitration in Greece. The focus will be on the enforcement of arbitral awards, owing to the concentration of recent developments in these areas. It will also discuss the 2019 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters, which entered into force in Greece in September 2023. Supreme Court judgment No 805/2021 – ex parte proceedings in arbitration The Supreme Court of Greece, in its judgment No 805/2021, addressed critical procedural questions regarding ex parte applications for the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards. The court clari - fied two pivotal points (and, in this way, went against the prevailing position in legal doctrine): whether the application to declare an award enforceable must be directed to the award debtor and whether the award debtor is rendered a formal litigant party in such pro - ceedings. The court answered negatively to both, establishing that these applications do not require the procedural presence or notification of the award debtor, thus confirming the non-contentious nature of these proceedings. Ex parte proceedings – definition and context Ex parte proceedings are those conducted without the presence of all parties involved, typically because the nature of the proceedings requires immediate action or because one party is unresponsive or because of the non-contentious nature of the proceedings in question, as was the case here. In the context of arbitration, ex parte applications are often made to enforce arbitral awards quickly and efficiently. Supreme Court’s rationale The Supreme Court’s decision in judgment No 805/2021 clarified the following two critical points regarding the procedural aspects of enforcing arbitral awards.
• Application direction – the court clarified that the application to declare an arbitral award enforceable does not need to be directed to and served upon the award debtor as an admissibility requirement. • Litigant status – the court further determined that the award debtor does not become a proper party in these proceedings, even if the petition is direct - ed and served upon them. For that to happen, the award debtor must either: (a) be summoned by the court; (b) intervene in the pending proceedings; or (c) be formally summoned by the petitioner. These clarifications emphasise that the recognition of enforceability is inherently non-contentious and the absence of the award debtor does not infringe on any procedural requirements. The award debtor can bring a third-party challenge against the decision declar - ing the award enforceable, coupled with a motion to suspend enforceability. In result, however, the award creditor has the upper hand and initiative to act. Implications for arbitration practice This decision favours award creditors by streamlining the enforcement process. Key implications include the following. • Procedural simplicity and efficiency – award creditors can obtain enforcement of their awards without the court needing to hear the award debtor unless the court decides to summon them. This expedites the enforcement process, reducing delays and legal costs. • Minimal requirement for debtor involvement – the award debtor’s presence is not required for the rec - ognition and enforcement process, making it easier for creditors to secure enforcement. The single-member first-instance court of Agrinio, in its Decision No 193/2018, tackled the contentious issue of whether an arbitral award that mandates pay - ment in cryptocurrency aligns with Greek public poli - cy. Although the decision was made in 2018, it made headlines in 2022 when it was published (and was also ratified by the appellate court), drawing significant Agrinio court decision on cryptocurrency payments – public policy considerations
233 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook