Judge interprets meaning of "reciprocal enforcement procedures" in an arbitration agreement
The applicant sought an anti-suit injunction in respect of proceedings commenced by the respondent in Lebanon, which it was alleged breached the arbitration agreement entered into between the parties. The relevant arbitration agreement provided that the parties would arbitrate in London "to the extent there is no reciprocal enforcement procedures between the UK and the country in which the [respondent] is located". The applicant argued that the phrase meant that there had to be a bilateral or multilateral treaty in force between the UK and Lebanon (there is no such treaty in force). The respondent countered that all that was required was that the domestic laws of the two countries permitted mutual enforcement of judgments (e.g. under English common law, and its equivalent in Lebanon).
Bryan J found that that phrase meant that there had to be a bilateral or multilateral treaty in force between the UK and Lebanon, i.e. "reciprocal enforcement procedures" between the UK and Lebanon, which bind both countries equally.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
