This decision published by the Federal Supreme Court(Bundesgerichtshof) a couple of days ago on its website appears to be the latest instalment in the on-going saga of Franz Sedelmayer’s quest to enforce an investment treaty award against Russia. Of course, the Federal Supreme Court sticks to Germany’s practise of anonymous court reporting. The facts reported in the decision are so unique, however, that it cannot be anything else but the Sedelmayer case.
Franz Sedelmayer was awared damages under the German-Russian Investment treaty in an arbitration seated in Stockholm in 1998, and has spent more than 15 years enforceing it. The details have been reported extensively, see for example, this piece in the New York Times. Continue reading →
Dear Readers, as 2016 begins, I had a look at what you read in 2015. There are two topics that emerge as favourites: On the one hand, investor state arbitration, and on the other hand, sports arbitration. Out of the top ten, posts no. 2, 6 and 7 all relate the decision of the Munich courts in the Pechstein case, where an award of the Court of Arbitration for Sport in a doping case was not recognized in Germany.
The IBA’s Subcommittee on Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in 2014/2015 conducted a comparative study that looked at ‘public policy’ as a defence to the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards under the New York Convention. The country reports that the Subcommittee had solicited from Arbitration Committee members across various jurisdictions have now been published. Continue reading →