The present Panorama includes five commentaries of the most recent decisions of the French courts, dealing with quite diverse and interesting issues. As usual, Spanish translations of the decisions are followed by commentary of the bravest members of the French section of the CEA
First, the Supreme Court (Cour de Cassation) decision in the case “NLMK”, illustrates the control exercised by French courts regarding arbitrators’ duty of independence and the scope of the obligation of disclosure in the context of this analysis.
Second, through three decisions (two from the Tribunal de Conflits and one from the Conseil d’Etat) in the cases “Fosmax” and “Ryanair”, the commentary analyzes and clarifies the jurisdictional divergence existing in France between the ordinary (civil) and administrative courts regarding the enforcement of awards rendered in connection with certain public law contracts.
Third, the Paris Court of Appeal decision in the case “Venezuela v. Serafín García Armas” deals with the relevant elements to establish compliance with the investor’s nationality requirement in an investment arbitration based on the Bilateral Investment Treaty between Venezuela and the Kingdom of Spain.
Fourth, the decision of the Supreme Court in the case Garoubé, which confirms the previous Paris Court of Appeal decision of 24 May 2016, which fixes the boundaries of the powers granted to the French juge d’appui (judge acting in support of the arbitration) in case of denial of justice.
Finally, you will find the French Supreme Court decisions in the cases “Subway” and “MJA v. Airbus”, which are of great interest because they shed light as to when, according to Article 1448 of the French Code of Civil Procedure, the arbitral agreement may be considered as being manifestly void or manifestly not applicable.
We hope that you enjoy and find it an interesting read.
Iurgium [previously Spain Arbitration Review]