On 9 March 2023, the German Federal Court of Justice (“BGH”) confirmed the decision of the Higher Regional Court of Koblenz to refuse recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award issued in Russia.[1] Among others, the BGH held that the Arbitral Tribunal exceeded its personal jurisdiction by extending an arbitration agreement to a de facto group of companies. In its decision, the BGH answered several highly relevant questions: Is the enforcement court bound by a…
On 18 April 2023, the German Federal Ministry of Justice published its „Guidelines on the modernization of German…
Arbitration proceedings are becoming increasingly complex.[1] Pleadings are getting longer. Written evidence and the taking of evidence in…
Germany is a Model Law country. As a result, German Law provides for only limited grounds to set aside an arbitral award if the seat of arbitration is in Germany (Section 1059 German Code of Civil Procedure which is the equivalent to Article 34 UNCITRAL Model Law). Among others, German state courts can review whether an arbitral award violates German public policy. German public policy is only affected if the result of recognition or enforcement of…
A. LEGISLATION AND RULES A.1 Legislation Already in the 2017-2018 edition of this Yearbook, we had reported about…
The arbitrability of disputes concerning the validity and existence of patents has always been the subject of debate.…
One year ago, the Higher Regional Court Frankfurt decided that the Achmea-decision[1] by the Court of Justice of the EU (“CJEU“) is transferable to arbitration clauses in other BITs (see Global Arbitration News on 22 April 2021). Factual Background Two banks who provide financial services in the Croatian market (= the investors) had initiated arbitration proceedings against Croatia based on the BIT between Croatia and Austria. Croatia sought a declaration that the arbitration proceedings were…
A. LEGISLATION AND RULES A.1 Legislation In the 2017-2018 edition of this Yearbook, we reported about a working…
In a recent decision, the Higher Regional Court of Frankfurt defined the requirements and limits in which the…
Parties often chose arbitration over state court litigation because arbitral proceedings are more flexible and more efficient. Parties are typically not in the business of “litigating”, but want to resolve their (commercial) disputes in order to continue their business. A dispute is resolved by the decision of the tribunal, i.e. the arbitral award. In order to ensure a timely decision, most arbitral institutions provide for a time limit for the final award (e.g. six months…