These decisions have strengthened the confidence of companies and investors in Spanish arbitration, as they confirm that arbitral awards should not be set aside by the courts on objective grounds related to the subject matter of the dispute. They have the effect of considerably reducing the legal uncertainty associated with this form of dispute settlement. The grounds for refusal of recognition of an arbitral award are those provided for in the New York Convention. In essence, Spanish courts may refuse to recognize an arbitral award if the claimant proves that: In principle, the creditor should not be able to obtain seizures of amounts deposited in bank accounts opened with subsidiaries of banks (domestic or foreign) abroad, since subsidiaries constitute a separate legal entity and the jurisdiction of Spanish courts applies to the national territory. is restricted. Such a proceeding may not be construed as an appeal against the award to a court, in which the court may reassess the facts and evidence submitted to arbitration and/or law enforcement. If the parties were able to do so, it would defeat the purpose of arbitration, which is to avoid the resolution of a dispute through the courts. Any premium may be cancelled. The Spanish Arbitration Act expressly provides for the possibility of setting aside arbitral awards on jurisdiction and decisions on interim measures. The relevant Spanish legal framework is set out in the Spanish Arbitration Act (Law 60/2003) (the “Law”), which largely follows the UNCITRAL Model Law. The law protects arbitration from the influence of Spanish courts and guarantees the validity and effectiveness of arbitral awards.

It follows that these awards are inherently final and binding. “An action for annulment is the judicial review mechanism provided by arbitration law to ensure that the arbitration complies with the provisions of its rules. Such a review has a very limited content and does not allow a review of the merits of the case decided by the arbitrator, nor should it be considered as a second instance, since it can be based solely on the assessed causes provided for by law, without any of them – not even those relating to public policy – being interpreted in any way whatsoever: which modifies this restriction. In this context, the Spanish Constitutional Court (i.e. Decisions No. 174/1995 and No. 46/2020) held that the invalidity procedure consists of an external review procedure that excludes further judgments on arbitral awards and any interference with their assessment. According to the Spanish Arbitration Code, an award must: The arbitrators may rectify the award on their own initiative within 10 days of its pronouncement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, failure to comply with the time limit does not affect the validity of the award, but may engage the liability of the arbitrators. Article 42 of the Act describes the legal procedure to be followed. Under this article, an action for annulment is an abbreviated procedure before the civil court.

According to case law, a declaration of annulment cannot give rise to a new main hearing. This only has the effect that the original award is set aside. It is customary to agree on costs according to the economic interests of the dispute. Legal advisers usually calculate the lawyer`s fees in accordance with the rules of the bar association in which the proceedings take place. The procedure for applying for recognition of an arbitral award is governed by the Law on International Legal Cooperation in Civil Matters. There is no special court or chamber with specific rules for international arbitral awards. Various restrictions apply. The party must challenge the validity of the award by lodging an application for annulment within two months of service of the final award. In addition, the law provides only a limited number of grounds for challenging and possibly obtaining such a declaration of nullity resulting in a serious breach of (i) the arbitration agreement; or (ii) the essential procedural guarantees provided for in article 24 of the Spanish Constitution, both of which are expressly regulated in article 41.1 of the Act.

According to Art. In paragraph 41, the grounds for obtaining such a declaration of invalidity are as follows: in the event of a request for rectification, clarification, supplementation or rectification, the parties may request the setting aside of the award within two months from the date on which the application was decided. Spanish courts have recently recognized foreign arbitral awards pending the annulment of claims at the seat of arbitration (ATSJ Madrid 14/2018 of 23 January 2018, ATSJ Murcia 12/2019 of 12 April 2019). The courts considered that the award was final and binding on the parties, that there was no decision deferring the effects of arbitral awards, and that the 1958 New York Convention did not provide for the suspension of recognition proceedings. The request to set aside the award is technically not a request for redress or reparation, but an autonomous and exceptional procedure for monitoring the effectiveness of the arbitration. The effect of the proceedings is that the award in question may be declared void on any of the grounds set out in section 41.1. The existence of annulment of the proceedings at the seat of the arbitral proceedings shall not automatically entail the suspension of the recognition proceedings. The parties may submit to the arbitrators a request for correction, clarification, supplementation or correction of the award within 10 days of its service in domestic arbitration (one month in international arbitration). This article is the third in a series on the process and procedure for challenging arbitral awards in various national jurisdictions in Europe, prepared by Clyde & Co.`s European International Arbitration Team.

This third article deals with the procedure in Spain and was written by Carlos Cid and Pablo Nvono of the Madrid office of Clyde & Co. However, the law also provides for a nullity procedure under which Spanish arbitral awards may be challenged (Article 40). However, this procedure only applies to very specific circumstances that are expressly regulated (Article 41), as explained below. An arbitral award may not be appealed to a court, but may be appealed if the parties have expressly agreed to appeal to another arbitral tribunal. A decision recognizing an arbitral award in Spain is final and without appeal. Nevertheless, the party aggrieved by the judgment may lodge a constitutional complaint (recurso de amparo) with the Spanish Constitutional Court because his or her fundamental rights have been violated. Such a constitutional appeal does not have suspensive effect, but the Constitutional Court may grant the suspension of the execution proceedings on a temporary basis. Sentences rendered in Spain do not have to be recognized and are directly enforceable before the Spanish courts.

The creditor may apply to the court for measures of inquiry in enforcement proceedings in order to locate the debtor`s assets and rights. In this regard, at the request of the creditor, the court may request information from financial institutions, public bodies and registries, as well as natural and legal persons, in order to obtain a list of the debtor`s assets or rights. At present, Spanish courts are increasingly protecting arbitral tribunals and have sought to limit challenges to the validity and effectiveness of arbitral awards. If the plaintiff is a company or legal entity, he would also have to pay a court fee of € 150 at the time of the introduction of the action. If the application for setting aside is granted, the award (or certain points in the award) shall be deemed to be set aside and the parties may, if necessary, commence further arbitration. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Convention shall apply if the arbitration involves two Parties from among the States Parties to the European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration of 1961 (Geneva Convention). The Geneva Convention expressly provides that courts may refuse recognition only if the setting aside of the arbitral award at the seat is based on the following grounds: “If a party who has knowledge of the breach of a non-mandatory provision of this Law or of a requirement of the arbitration agreement does not raise its objection within the prescribed period, or in the absence of such a time limit, it shall be deemed as soon as possible that: that party has waived its right to object in accordance with this Law. Under Title VII of the Act, an action for annulment is subject to the abridged application procedure.