Conflict of Laws
  • About
  • Editorial board
  • Subscription
  • Submission
  • Materials
  • Contact
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu

Dallah: French Court Pays No Attention to Lords’ Lecture

February 18, 2011/in /by Gilles Cuniberti
image_pdfimage_print

The Paris Court of Appeal ruled yesterday on the action introduced by the Government of Pakistan to set aside the award which had ordered it to pay over USD 20 million to Dallah.

The Court found that the arbitral tribunal had been right to retain jurisdiction in this case, and dismissed the action of Pakistan.

We had already reported on the English decisions which had denied enforcement of this award in the United Kingdom. Quite remarkably, the English Court of appeal and then the UK Supreme court held that, under French law, the arbitral tribunal did not have jurisdiction.

It seems that French judges were unimpressed by the lectures that Lord Collins and Lord Mance gave on the French law of arbitration at this occasion.

Someone must now find a solution to this mess:  Twickenham?

More on the reasons of the French court soon.

Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on X
  • Share on WhatsApp
  • Share on Pinterest
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Share on Vk
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png 0 0 Gilles Cuniberti https://conflictoflaws.net/News/2020/08/CoL_Banner-1.png Gilles Cuniberti2011-02-18 09:51:262011-02-18 09:54:21Dallah: French Court Pays No Attention to Lords’ Lecture

Categories

  • Views
  • News

Most Recent Posts

  • Private International Law and European Society August 4, 2026
  • The New Zealand Supreme Court’s judgment in Kea Investments Ltd v Wikeley on anti-enforcement relief August 3, 2026
  • Beyond Domicile: The BHP Litigation and the Functional Interconnection of Public and Private International Law August 3, 2026
  • Conflicts of jurisdiction in Senegal: lesson from the Senegalese Supreme Court on Lis Pendens and the Exequatur of foreign judgments July 27, 2026
  • Adoption in the proposal for a European Parenthood Regulation July 21, 2026
  • Copyright, Targeting and Geo-Blocking: The CJEU Stirs the Pot July 15, 2026
  • A Follow-Up: The German Judges Association’s Response to the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions July 15, 2026
  • Private International Law Dimensions of Singapore’s New Legislation to Combat Online Harms July 14, 2026
  • The 1961 HCCH Apostille Convention: Why All African Countries Should Ratify It? — Insights from Judicial Practice in Africa July 14, 2026
  • The enforcement of an advance on costs for substitute performance at the expense of a Russian debtor in German-French legal relations July 2, 2026
  • “Yes, in principle, but not quite there yet…” – Some Observations on the Public Consultation on the HCCH Draft Text of a Future Convention on Parallel Proceedings and Related Actions June 29, 2026
  • Judgment Mobility Rules in India’s Private International Law Regime: No place for a revision au fond? June 26, 2026
  • Nothing to See Here: The CJEU’s Decision in Case C-232/25 Idzinski June 18, 2026
  • Refusal to Enforce in Egypt of a Californian (U.S.) Judgment for Lack of Reciprocity: What Has Gotten into the Egyptian Supreme Court? June 15, 2026
  • PRC Double Interest neither Double nor Penal: Australian Courts Clear Its Name When Enforcing Chinese Judgments June 10, 2026
Link to: First Issue of 2011’s Journal du Droit International Link to: First Issue of 2011’s Journal du Droit International First Issue of 2011’s Journal du Droit International Link to: ICCS Convention No. 29 on the recognition of decisions recording a sex reassignment Link to: ICCS Convention No. 29 on the recognition of decisions recording a sex reassignment ICCS Convention No. 29 on the recognition of decisions recording a sex reas...
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top