Spotlight on France: Navigating the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards Annulled at the Seat

Current Legal Framework and Practical Implications, from France

Recognition and Enforcement in France of Foreign Arbitral Awards Annulled at the Seat

Article V of the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the “New York Convention”) lists the grounds on which the recognition and enforcement of an award “may” be refused. While some contracting States to the New York Convention follow the grounds listed in Article V, others apply more favorable domestic rules and exclude certain of these grounds.

France has taken the latter approach. It excludes, in particular, the ground set out in Article V(1)(e) of the New York Convention, which provides that a court “may” refuse the recognition and enforcement of an award that “has been set aside by a competent authority in which, or under the law of which, that award was made” (See Article 1520 of the French Code of Civil Procedure (“FCCP”) which does not list the annulment of an award by the courts at the seat of arbitration as a ground for refusing its recognition and enforcement). Accordingly, French courts recognize and enforce awards rendered abroad that have been annulled at the seat (See French Cour de Cassation, 1st Civil Chamber, 9 October 1984, 83-11.355; 10 March 1993, 91-16.041; 23 March 1994, 92-15.137; 29 June 2007, 05-18.053; Paris Court of Appeal, 14 January 1997, 95/23025).

The French Cour de cassation explained the reasoning behind this approach by stating that an international arbitral award “is not anchored in any national legal order” but is a “decision of international justice whose validity must be assessed based on the rules applicable in the country where its recognition and enforcement are sought” (French Cour de Cassation, 1st Civil Chamber, 29 June 2007, 05-18.053).

This principle has since been extended to domestic (and not only international) awards rendered abroad and annulled at the seat (See Paris Court of Appeal, 21 May 2019, 17/19850, confirmed by French Cour de Cassation, 1st Civil Chamber, 13 January 2021, 19-22.932).

Refusal by French Courts to Recognize and Enforce Awards Incompatible with an Enforceable Foreign Judgment

French courts recognize and enforce awards rendered abroad which have been annulled at the seat unless such recognition and enforcement breaches French international public policy, commonly defined as “the set of values a breach of which could not be tolerated by the French legal order, even in international cases” (See Fouchard, Gaillard, & Goldman, On International Commercial Arbitration, Kluwer Law International, 1999, para. 1648).

The Paris Court of Appeal has specified, in a decision 19/11413 dated 12 July 2021, that a breach of French international public policy may occur if an award is “incompatible” with a domestic or foreign judgment already enforceable in France. The Paris Court of Appeal has further specified that decisions are “incompatible” when they produce “mutually exclusive legal consequences” and are “equally enforceable on French territory” (See Paris Court of Appeal, 11 January 2022, 20/17923, para. 54. See also Paris Court of Appeal, 1 February 2022, 19/22977).

This raises the question of whether the recognition and enforcement of an award is “incompatible” with a foreign judgment – already recognized in France – that annuls that same award. The response is, logically, yes, as the two decisions have direct opposite effects (one decision granting effect to the award and the other depriving it of any effect).

This question, in turn, raises another: whether a foreign judgment that annuls an award may be recognized in France given the French principle of the autonomy of arbitral awards. Indeed, the principle of the autonomy of arbitral awards provides that the validity of an award must be assessed according to the rules applicable in the country where recognition and enforcement are sought. Yet, recognizing a foreign judgment that annuls an award precludes such assessment and therefore breaches (or at least undermines) the principle of the autonomy of arbitral awards.

That said, it should be recalled that a foreign judgment will only be denied recognition in France if one or more of the three following conditions is not met (assuming that there are no applicable international conventions on the recognition and enforcement of judgments):

1. the foreign court’s indirect jurisdiction is established;
2. the foreign judgment complies with international public policy; and
3. there is no fraud.

Refusing to recognize a foreign judgment that annuls an award because it breaches the principle of the autonomy of arbitral awards does not appear fall within any one of these three conditions – unless one argues that a breach of the principle of the autonomy of arbitral awards would amount to a breach of French international public policy.  

Practical Consequences Arising from the Timing of Requests for Recognition and Enforcement of an Award 

If the foreign judgment annulling the award is recognized in France before the recognition and enforcement of the award is sought:

If a party seeks to recognize and enforce in France an award rendered abroad, the judicial court of Paris (Tribunal judiciaire de Paris) will issue an order granting the exequatur (ordonnance d’exequatur), provided that (i) the existence of the award is established and (ii) the recognition or enforcement of the award is not manifestly contrary to international public policy (Article 1514 of the FCCP), bearing in mind that this procedure is ex parte (Article 1516, para. 2 of the FCCP). However, on appeal, the Paris Court of Appeal may refuse the recognition and enforcement of the award if it considers it to be incompatible with the foreign judgment – already-recognized in France – that annuls it.

A party may therefore first seek to recognize, in France, the foreign judgment that annulled the award in order to preclude the recognition and enforcement of that award (if France is a potential jurisdiction for enforcement).

If the foreign judgment annulling the award has not yet been recognized when the recognition and enforcement of the award is sought:

If the judicial court of Paris issues the order granting the exequatur of the award, the challenging party may, on appeal before the Paris Court of Appeal, request the Court to recognize the foreign judgment that annuls the award by way of an incidental request (demande incidente). In a recent decision 24/18541 rendered on 16 September 2025 (relating to the recognition and enforcement of an award), the Paris Court of Appeal confirmed that the recognition of a foreign judgment may be requested by way of an incidental request even if the object of the proceedings is not the recognition of that judgment (See also French Cour de Cassation, 1st Civil Chamber, 10 January 2018, 16-20.416).

While the Court ultimately denied the recognition of the foreign judgment (on the ground of breach of procedural international public policy), it nonetheless ruled on the incidental request first. This suggests that, had it accepted to recognize the foreign judgment, it could have refused to recognize and enforce the award due to the incompatibility between the two decisions.

It therefore remains to be seen whether, in appeal proceedings initiated against the recognition and enforcement of an award, the Paris Court of Appeal will deal first with any incidental request to recognize a foreign judgment which annulled that award.

This article was originally published on Daily Jus on Friday 12th of December, with thanks to Jus Mundi & Jus Connect.