We use cookies on this site to provide you with an informative and engaging experience and also to help us to continually improve our site for you. Without allowing cookies certain features of the site will not be available. To learn more about how we use cookies, please view our cookie policy. By clicking on ‘I AGREE’, you consent to our use of cookies on this device in accordance with our policy.

Logo of Wolters Kluwer, Kluwer Law Online
Journal of International Arbitration
Search content button

Home > All journals > Journal of International Arbitration > 42(1) >

Sovereign Immunity as an Obstacle to Enforcement: The Luxembourg Approach

Cover image ofJournal of International Arbitration

$25.00 - Rental (PDF) *

$49.00 - Article (PDF) *

*service fee may apply
Sovereign Immunity as an Obstacle to Enforcement: The Luxembourg Approach


Journal of International Arbitration
Volume 42, Issue 1 (2025) pp. 19 – 38

httpss://doi.org/10.54648/joia2025009



Abstract

The article examines the complex interplay between sovereign immunity and the enforcement of arbitral awards, particularly in Luxembourg. It highlights the distinction between immunity from jurisdiction and execution, as well as their implications for enforcement. Luxembourg courts adopt a restrictive approach to sovereign immunity from jurisdiction and execution. 

Through and analysis of key international conventions like the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (the 'ICSID' Convention) and New York Conventions, alongside Luxembourg’s procedural rules, their complementary roles in enforcement processes is emphasized. It is furthermore explained that the exequatur procedure – meaning the recognition of an arbitral award as legally binding – is separate from execution, which in turn involves seizing the debtor’s assets. Luxembourg’s judiciary aligns with international standards, ensuring state assets used for sovereign purposes remain protected, while commercial assets may be subject to enforcement. 

Case law is explored to demonstrate Luxembourg’s pro-arbitration stance, including the conditions under which waivers of immunity are recognized. The article concludes that Luxembourg strikes a balance between upholding sovereign immunity and facilitating enforcement, positioning itself as a reliable forum for arbitration, while safeguarding state sovereignty and creditors’ rights within a stable legal framework. 


Keywords

Arbitration, Enforcement, Execution, Exequatur, ICSID Convention, Luxembourg, New York Convention, Sovereign Immunity, State Assets, Waiver


Extract




Subscribe to this journal

Interested in a subscription? Contact our sales team

Browse by practice area
Share
Stay up to date


RSSETOC