LOOKING BACK AT 2007 - Dispute Resolution Journal - Vol. 63, No. 2
Lawrence S. Schaner is a partner and John R. Schleppenbach is an associate in the Chicago office of Jenner & Block LLP. Mr. Schaner chairs, and Mr. Schleppenbach practices in, the firm’s Arbitration, Domestic and International Practice Group. This article is based on a paper presented at the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR) 6th Annual Miami International Arbitration Conference March 30-April 1, 2008. The authors can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org or email@example.com.
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