Paris Court of Appeal, Sector 5 chamber 16 (Pôle 5 Chambre 16), 9 December 2025 – n° 25/01855
In a significant decision for international arbitration in France, the Paris Court of Appeal confirmed the exequatur of an ICC award in favour of Enka Renewables LLC while simultaneously ordering a stay of its enforcement under Article 1526(2) of the French Code of Civil Procedure. The judgment is noteworthy for two reasons: First, the Court reaffirmed that the existence of annulment proceedings does not affect the granting of exequatur. Second, the Court exercised its autonomous discretionary power to suspend enforcement – even after exequatur was granted – where immediate execution would gravely infringe the debtor’s rights.
Factual background
Enka Renewables LLC (“Enka”), a project company registered in Georgia and part of a Turkish engineering group, entered a BOO (Build–Own–Operate) Agreement with the Republic of Georgia in 2019 for the USD 800 million Namakhvani hydropower project.
Large‑scale protests by local communities and environmental groups disrupted the project, and Enka terminated the BOO Agreement in 2021, invoking force majeure and Georgia’s alleged events of default. In 2022, Enka initiated ICC arbitration seeking compensation for termination and the value of transferred assets.
On 13 November 2024,[1] the arbitral tribunal rendered a final award, followed by an addendum dated 6 January 2025,[2] holding that the termination was and ordering Georgia to pay approximately 400 million USD.
Enka sought exequatur before the Paris Court of Appeal. Georgia challenged the exequatur application, filed an application for annulment before the same court, and sought a stay of enforcement.
Legal framework under French law
The recognition and enforcement of international arbitral awards are governed by Articles 1514 to 1520 of the French Code of Civil Procedure. Under Article 1514, an international award is recognised if its existence is established, unless recognition or enforcement would be contrary to international public policy.
Annulment proceedings are regulated by Article 1520 CPC and are limited to five grounds, including violation of due process or international public policy. The filing of an annulment application has no automatic effect on enforcement. Article 1526 states expressly that annulment does not suspend enforcement. Article 1526 further authorises the judge to stay or adjust enforcement where immediate execution would gravely infringe a party’s rights.
The French Court of Appeal decision
The Court first examined whether the award fulfilled the conditions for exequatur under Article 1514 CPC. Georgia argued that the award violated international public policy, claiming that the tribunal had relied on a “Financial Model” annexed to the record without ensuring adversarial debate. The Court recalled the narrow scope of its review under Article 1514 CPC. Only a manifest breach of international public policy, apparent from the face of the award, can justify refusing exequatur. After examining the award, the Court did not find such a breach. The Court confirmed that the existence of annulment proceedings did not influence the granting of exequatur, which is assessed autonomously under Article 1514 CPC.
Having granted exequatur, the Court then examined Georgia’s request for a stay of enforcement under Article 1526. Georgia argued that immediate enforcement of a USD 400 million award would gravely affect essential public budgets, representing 60% of the national defence budget and around 250% of the Ministry of Justice’s annual allocation. The Court accepted this evidence as demonstrating a serious and concrete impact on Georgia’s ability to meet vital public functions.
The Court also noted that Enka was a special‑purpose project company created solely for the Namakhvani project and no longer carrying any business activities or holding significant assets. In the Court’s view, this increased the risk that sums paid in enforcement might not be recoverable should the award ultimately be annulled. These combined factors constituted a grave infringement of Georgia’s rights, justifying a suspension of enforcement.
The Court therefore ordered a stay of enforcement of the award and its addendum until the decision on the annulment application is rendered.
Conclusion
The Court’s statements reaffirm the autonomy of exequatur from annulment proceedings: the mere fact that an award is challenged in annulment has no influence on whether exequatur is granted. Parties opposing enforcement cannot rely on the existence of an annulment application to resist exequatur.
At the same time, the decision illustrates the flexibility afforded by Article 1526 of the French Code of Civil Procedure, which allows courts to prevent enforcement where immediate execution would gravely affect protected interests. This mechanism operates independently from annulment and can be invoked even when exequatur is granted.
This dual approach consolidates France’s standing as a jurisdiction that simultaneously promotes the enforceability of awards and protects against disproportionate enforcement risks.
[1] Enka Renewables LLC v. Georgia, ICC Case No. 26904/HBH, Award, 13 November 2024
[2] Enka Renewables LLC v. Georgia, ICC Case No. 26904/HBH, Addendum to the final award, 6 January 2025
