MAURITIUS Trends and Developments Contributed by: Ali Adamjee and Raza Currimjee, Chambers of Sir Hamid Moollan KC
The pro-enforcement trend continues with the recent decision in Laxmanbhai v Minaco [2025] SCJ 21. The Supreme Court rejected the award debtor’s applica - tion to set aside an award issued under the Interna - tional Arbitration Act (the seat of the arbitration was Port Louis, Mauritius) on the grounds that the arbitra - tor had breached the rules of natural justice. The court observed that the award debtor had fully participated in the arbitration process after the impugned prelimi - nary award had been delivered by the arbitrator and that it did not, at any point in time, attempt to show its disapproval of the said award.
There is also welcome authority on Article VI of the New York Convention in Laporte v Laporte [2025] SCJ 35, although the facts of that case are particular in that the setting aside and the enforcement played out in the courts of the seat (ie, Mauritius). The Supreme Court awarded security under Article VI of the New York Convention in the full amount of the award. The court recognised that it had the power to adjourn enforcement proceedings on its own motion and to award security sought by the enforcing party, notwith - standing the fact that the party resisting enforcement did not seek an adjournment of the enforcement pro - ceedings.
298 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook