The second part of Article III of the 1958 New York Convention, which relates to discriminatory treatment between domestic and foreign arbitral awards, states that:
“There shall not be imposed substantially more onerous conditions or higher fees or charges on the recognition or enforcement of arbitral awards to which this Convention applies than are imposed on the recognition or enforcement of domestic arbitral awards.”
The procedure for enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Brazil is identical to the procedure for domestic awards (those made in the Brazilian territory): both are enforceable under provisions of the Brazilian Civil Procedure Code (Section 34 of the Brazilian Arbitration Act establishes that foreign arbitral awards are those made outside the Brazilian territory). Before becoming enforceable in Brazil, however, foreign arbitral awards must receive a leave for enforcement —known in Brazil as exequatur or "homologação"— from the Superior Tribunal de Justiça (“STJ”). Domestic arbitral awards, on the other and, are not subject to any exequatur procedure, as domestic awards are final and binding, and have the same and effect as a Brazilian court judgment (Section 18 of the Brazilian Arbitration Act).
The exequatur procedure before the STJ consists of separate hearings, and it is common that such separate hearings take place months apart from each other. One of the reasons for this long and cumbersome process is that the STJ has a remarkable backlog of cases waiting for judgment.
The application for recognition of a foreign arbitral award is a separate legal process that precedes enforcement. A foreign arbitral award is enforceable by means of a legal action filed with the local branch of the Justiça Federal (Federal Court) where enforcement is sought. Such action is separate —and subsequent— to the previous confirmation of the foreign award, which takes place physically in Brasília, capital of Brazil, where the STJ is located.
Does Brazilian law provides for a “more onerous condition” of enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, as per the language of Article III of the 1958 New York Convention? To date, the answer to this question has not been addressed by any Brazilian court of law.
“There shall not be imposed substantially more onerous conditions or higher fees or charges on the recognition or enforcement of arbitral awards to which this Convention applies than are imposed on the recognition or enforcement of domestic arbitral awards.”
The procedure for enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Brazil is identical to the procedure for domestic awards (those made in the Brazilian territory): both are enforceable under provisions of the Brazilian Civil Procedure Code (Section 34 of the Brazilian Arbitration Act establishes that foreign arbitral awards are those made outside the Brazilian territory). Before becoming enforceable in Brazil, however, foreign arbitral awards must receive a leave for enforcement —known in Brazil as exequatur or "homologação"— from the Superior Tribunal de Justiça (“STJ”). Domestic arbitral awards, on the other and, are not subject to any exequatur procedure, as domestic awards are final and binding, and have the same and effect as a Brazilian court judgment (Section 18 of the Brazilian Arbitration Act).
The exequatur procedure before the STJ consists of separate hearings, and it is common that such separate hearings take place months apart from each other. One of the reasons for this long and cumbersome process is that the STJ has a remarkable backlog of cases waiting for judgment.
The application for recognition of a foreign arbitral award is a separate legal process that precedes enforcement. A foreign arbitral award is enforceable by means of a legal action filed with the local branch of the Justiça Federal (Federal Court) where enforcement is sought. Such action is separate —and subsequent— to the previous confirmation of the foreign award, which takes place physically in Brasília, capital of Brazil, where the STJ is located.
Does Brazilian law provides for a “more onerous condition” of enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, as per the language of Article III of the 1958 New York Convention? To date, the answer to this question has not been addressed by any Brazilian court of law.
3 comments:
Incessant aeon, a construction party turned up to start edifice a billet on the erode in view lot.
The [url=http://limaimenapolnostu.edublogs.org/2012/11/28/shy-japanese-come-to-the-interview-wearing-masks/]4ik2l5rg[/url] [url=http://daclac.000space.com/isu.html]698295[/url] [url=http://poa7.000space.com/yfd.html]567194[/url] 291013 446245 infantile people's 5-year-old daughter sequel took an avail in all the
activity current on next door and drained much of each era observing the workers.
Equal hour, a construction do turned up to start erection a speciality on the no big deal lot.
The [url=http://mios.my-board.org/osd.html]556500[/url] 2su6k2zm 887841 [url=http://kamachu.000space.com/ned.html]310833[/url] [url=http://daclac.000space.com/abd.html]678546[/url] babyish lone's own in person's 5-year-old daughter in actuality took an disconcert in all the
vitality going on next door and dog-tired much of each light of day observing the workers.
Ditty bode, a construction team turned up to start edifice a billet on the incomplete in lot.
The 885494 [url=http://daclac.000space.com/jsd.html]209476[/url] [url=http://kamachu.000space.com/msu.html]528016[/url] 2se2c6qo 262506 infantile broadcast's 5-year-old daughter spring up took an investment in all the
animation growing on next door and dog-tired much of each epoch observing the workers.
Post a Comment