Joanna Kolber (Partner) and Su-Yi Leung Wing Cheung (Associate) from our Dispute Resolution practice have published a short case note with Thomson Reuters’ Practical Law Arbitration on the recent decision of the Belgian Court of Cassation of 12 April 2024.

The commentary reflects on the recent Manchester Securities v Republic of Poland decision (C.22.0348.F (12 April 2024)), in which the Belgian Court of Cassation held that the role of annulment is restricted to verifying whether an arbitral award’s effects are contrary to public policy, regardless of how the public policy provisions were applied by the arbitral tribunal.

In the case at hand, the Brussels Court of First instance had set aside a USD 10 million investment arbitration award rendered against the Republic of Poland, based on a thorough examination of the facts and the law at stake. The Court of Cassation confirmed its previous case law and quashed the annulment decision, holding that the annulment court had violated article 1717, section 3 b) ii of the Belgian Judicial Code. The violation consisted in setting aside the award following a full scope assessment of the application of public policy rules without examining the actual effects of the award on public policy.

The Belgian Court of Cassation has clearly ruled in favour of arbitration by requiring annulment courts to conduct a specific and well-reasoned analysis of the effects of the award rather than a full review of the case.

Please click here to read the full article : https://lnkd.in/eWfTfcbK.

Reproduced from Practical Law with the permission of the publishers. Copyright © 2024 Thomson Reuters, all rights reserved.

For further information, visit www.practicallaw.com