Diag Human Se v Czech Republic

Diag Human Se v Czech Republic

The award is not binding under s103(2)(f) Arbitration Act 1996 because it remains subject to 'ordinary recourse'—a review process validly triggered under the arbitration agreement. The Austrian Supreme Court's decision refusing enforcement on the same basis creates an issue estoppel. Therefore, the English court must set aside the ex parte enforcement order and refuse partial enforcement.

Parties
Claimant: Diag Human SE; Defendant: The Czech Republic
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Enforcement (commercial) / Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Enforcement Order
Outcome
Order set aside; enforcement refused
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, Issue Estoppel, Interpretation of 'binding' Under New York Convention, Authority to Trigger Arbitral Review, Partial Enforcement of Awards
Arbitration International Law Commercial Law Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards Issue Estoppel Interpretation of 'binding' Under New York Convention Authority to Trigger Arbitral Review Partial Enforcement of Awards

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Diag Human SE

Claimant

The Czech Republic

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Enforcement (commercial) / Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Enforcement Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitral award is 'binding' for purposes of enforcement under s103(2)(f) Arbitration Act 1996 and the New York Convention
  2. 2 Whether an issue estoppel arises from the Austrian Supreme Court decision refusing enforcement
  3. 3 Whether the review process under the arbitration agreement was validly triggered by the Czech Republic

Ratio Decidendi

The award is not binding under s103(2)(f) Arbitration Act 1996 because it remains subject to 'ordinary recourse'—a review process validly triggered under the arbitration agreement. The Austrian Supreme Court's decision refusing enforcement on the same basis creates an issue estoppel. Therefore, the English court must set aside the ex parte enforcement order and refuse partial enforcement.

Court Disposition

Order set aside; enforcement refused

Orders

  • Order of Burton J dated 21 July 2011 set aside
  • Application for partial enforcement dismissed