Originally from Dispute Resolution Journal

The authors discuss the latest U.S. cases arising out of international arbitration awards, focusing on enforcement battles and the arguments that the challengers made, in most cases unsuccessfully.

When Vince Lombardi, the legendary coach of the Green Bay Packers, said of football, “Winning isn’t everything; it’s the only thing,” he might just as easily be describing the attitude of parties who are disputing the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in the courts. In 2007, the parties challenging enforcement were remarkably unsuccessful. U.S. district courts confirmed international arbitration awards almost across the board.

Overall, federal district courts took a dim view of attempts by parties to avoid the results of international arbitration proceedings. Most of these cases were decided in the Southern District of New York, but there were a few noteworthy appellate decisions by the 2nd Circuit and the District of Columbia Circuit.

This article surveys the enforcement battles waged in 2007. It focuses on the arguments the challengers made against recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards under the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York Convention),1 and in one case under the Inter-American Convention on International Commercial Arbitration (Panama Convention).2