KluwerArbitration ITA Arbitration Report, Volume No. XXIV, Issue No. 7 (July 2026)
July 26, 2026
The Institute of Transnational Arbitration (ITA), in collaboration with the ITA Board of Reporters, is happy to inform you that the latest ITA Arbitration Report was published: a free email subscription service available at KluwerArbitration.com delivering timely reports on awards, cases, legislation and current developments from over 60 countries and 12 institutions. To get your free subscription to the ITA Arbitration Report, click here.
The ITA Board of Reporters have reported on the following court decisions.
Arthur Dong, JunHe LLP, ITA Reporter for China
On 26 December 2025, Nanjing Intermediate Court granted recognition and enforcement of an ICC award rendered in Zurich, Switzerland. The court held that, in the hearing held in Zurich, the tribunal’s examination of witnesses who then were in Mainland China and attended the hearing by video conference, did not violate Article 294 of the Civil Procedure Law of China which prohibits foreign authorities and foreign individuals from taking evidence in Mainland China unless permitted in advance by the authority of China, therefore the respondent’s public policy defense under Article V of the New York Convention is unfounded. The court held that the ICC Court is a non-governmental dispute resolution institution and it is not a ‘foreign authority’, therefore Article 294 of the Civil Procedure Law of China is inapplicable.
Nataliya Barysheva, Valentine Chessa and Yoshie Concha Takeshita, MCL Arbitration, ITA Reporters for France
The French Cour de cassation confirmed that a party waives its right to challenge an arbitrator’s independence if it fails to raise, during the arbitration, circumstances it knew or should have known, even where those circumstances consist of criminal proceedings against the arbitrator.
Nataliya Barysheva, Valentine Chessa and Yoshie Concha Takeshita, MCL Arbitration, ITA Reporters for France
The French Cour de cassation reaffirms its objective approach to assessing the independence of arbitrators and confirms that an award rendered by an arbitrator whose firm assisted a major shareholder of one of the parties may justify setting aside the award.
Harry Nettlau, Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, and Berta Boknik, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, ITA Reporters for Germany
An arbitral award is subject to unrestricted review by state courts with regard to the application of competition law, both in terms of fact and law. The relevant question for a potential violation of the ordre public is not whether the arbitral tribunal examined and reasonably assessed competition law concerns, but whether substantive competition law issues – including Art. 101 TFEU – are raised by the content of the award. This is the case, when an arbitral tribunal interprets a contractual non-compete clause too broadly in violation of Art. 101 TFEU.
OLG Köln – 19 Sch 12/25, Higher Regional Court of Cologne, 19 Sch 12/25, 16 January 2026
Harry Nettlau, Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, and Berta Boknik, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, ITA Reporters for Germany
Notification of arbitral proceedings by e-mail constitutes proper notice within the meaning of Art. V(1)(b) NYC. An e-mail is deemed received once it becomes available for retrieval on the recipient’s e-mail server; actual knowledge is not required. The use of a spam filter that redirects e-mails from unknown senders to a spam folder does not preclude valid receipt, as operating a spam filter falls within the recipient’s sphere of risk. A party publishing an e-mail address in its letterhead or website imprint must expect to receive legally significant communications at that address, including notifications from arbitral tribunals.
Kitty Zheng and Gaia Butt, Hui Zhong Law Firm, ITA Reporters for Hong Kong
The High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (the ‘Court’) reviewed a petition by China Citic Financial AMC International Holdings Limited (the ‘Petitioner’) to wind-up Jingrui Holdings Limited (an entity incorporated in the Cayman Islands, the ‘Company’). The Court granted the winding-up order after finding that it had insolvency jurisdiction over the Company and the Company never had a genuine intention to arbitrate despite the fact that the transaction documents in question contained an arbitration clause.
Alia O. Algazzar and Mohamed S. Abdel Wahab, Zulficar & Partners, ITA Reporters for OHADA
The Common Court of Justice and Arbitration (the ‘Court’) dismissed an action for the annulment of a CCJA award, holding that the tribunal did not violate the adversarial principle or international public policy by admitting a national law shortly before the closing arguments at the hearing. The Court established that a published national law (such as an Ordinance-Law published in the Official Gazette) is not subject to the strict evidentiary communication rules applicable to ordinary factual exhibits, as parties are legally presumed to know the law.
Mladen Stojiljković, Nater Dallafior Rechtsanwälte AG, ITA Reporter for Switzerland
The Swiss Federal Supreme Court upheld the conviction of a Geneva-based lawyer for forgery after he signed a document presented as an arbitral award despite no genuine arbitration having taken place.
Ismail G. Esin, Esin Attorney Partnership, and Stephan Wilske, Gleiss Lutz, ITA Reporters for Türkiye (formerly Turkey)
The 13th Civil Chamber of the Istanbul Regional Court of Appeals (‘Court of Appeals’) held that a final foreign arbitral award may constitute ‘approximate proof’ of a due and unsecured monetary claim for the purposes of provisional attachment, even if not yet recognized and enforced in Türkiye. However, it clarified that such an award does not have the force of a judgment under Article 38 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law (‘EBL’) and therefore cannot justify waiving the provision of security by the creditor. Accordingly, the court partially upheld the appeal and ordered the provisional attachment subject to the provision of security.
Enrique Molina, White & Case LLP, ITA Reporter for the United States of America
In Pott v. World Capital Properties, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed that a non-signatory to an arbitration agreement may be bound by an arbitral award where that non-signatory consented to have the tribunal decide arbitrability by signing the ICC Terms of Reference. Building on the Supreme Court's holding in GE Energy, the court confirmed that the New York and Panama Conventions do not foreclose enforcement against non-signatories, leaving domestic doctrines such as veil-piercing and alter ego available to extend an arbitration clause's reach. The ruling underscores the binding consequences of participating in arbitral proceedings, even while contesting jurisdiction.
Comments (0)
Your email address will not be published.
You may also like
July 25, 2026
