in a decision issued September 16, the Paris Court of Appeal rejected an attempt by Société Nationale d’Électricité and the Democratic Republic of the Congo to set aside an arbitral award issued under the International Chamber of Commerce.
The court held that, in principle, a direct conflict between an arbitral award and a foreign judgment could breach international public policy—but only under specific conditions. Such a breach may arise where the foreign judgment has already been formally recognized in France, a process known as exequatur, and where the two decisions produce mutually exclusive outcomes.
In this case, however, the judges found no such conflict. The Congolese judgment relied upon by SNEL had previously been denied recognition in France because the opposing party had not been properly notified of the proceedings. Without that recognition, the court concluded, the alleged inconsistency between the rulings could not trigger a violation of public policy.
The ruling also underscored a key principle in international arbitration: the mere fact that an arbitral tribunal disregards the legal authority, or res judicata, of a foreign judgment does not automatically justify setting aside the award.
Legal analysts say the decision provides further clarity on how French courts navigate tensions between arbitration and national court judgments, while signaling continued judicial support for the enforcement of arbitral awards.
