The Panorama of French jurisprudence features some of the most interesting decisions rendered by the French Cour de Cassation and Cour d’Appel in the field of international arbitration. Three court decisions delivered in 2018 will be commented in this number.
First, the decision of the French Supreme Court in the case which opposed Mr. Elie X v. Total Outre-mer reminds us that an arbitral award, depending on its drafting, does not necessarily constitute an enforceable instrument under the French Code de procédure civile d’exécution.
Second, the French Supreme Court decision in the case Honeywell v. Valeo allows us to review the application by the French courts of the compétence-compétence principle, its negative effect and the criteria applied by the French courts to perform its prima facie assessment of the validity and scope of the arbitration clause.
Finally, a decision of the Paris Court of Appeals, recently confirmed by the French Supreme Court, sheds new light about the delicate balance between the arbitrator’s duty to research and disclose any circumstance likely to give rise to justifiable doubts as to his impartiality and independence, and the parties’ obligation to be proactive and show curiosity.
Each of these decisions is translated into Spanish or English along with the commentary of esteemed members of the French chapter of the CEA.