International Arbitration

International Arbitration Information by Aceris Law LLC

  • International Arbitration Resources
  • Search Engine
  • Model Request for Arbitration
  • Model Answer to Request for Arbitration
  • Find International Arbitrators
  • Blog
  • Arbitration Laws
  • Arbitration Lawyers
You are here: Home / Annulment of Arbitration Award / ENFORCEMENT OF AN ANNULLED ARBITRATION AWARD: SOCIETE PT PUTRABALI ADYAMULIA v. RENA HOLDING French Court of Cassation (2007)

ENFORCEMENT OF AN ANNULLED ARBITRATION AWARD: SOCIETE PT PUTRABALI ADYAMULIA v. RENA HOLDING French Court of Cassation (2007)

04/05/2017 by International Arbitration

The case Société PT Putrabali Adyamulia v Société Rena Holding et Société Moguntia Est Epices is one of the French landmark cases concerning the enforcement of an arbitral award in France, where the enforcement of an annulled arbitration award is possible.

In the case, Putrabali sold a cargo of white pepper to Rena Holding. The cargo was lost in a shipwreck and Rena failed to pay. Putrabali then filed for arbitration.

The contract provided for arbitration of disputes according to the Rules of Arbitration and Appeal of the International General Produce Association (IGPA).

The Arbitral Tribunal was constituted in London and issued an award in favor of Rena Holding.

Following this decision, Putrabali appealed to the High Court in London, which partially annulled the award. The court deemed that Rena’s failure to pay constituted a breach of contract. Afterwards, the Arbitral Tribunal issued a second award in favor of Putrabali and ordered Rena Holding to pay the price of the lost cargo.

Rena Holding then sought enforcement in France of the first award, and the President of the Paris Court granted enforcement of the award. The Paris Court of Appeal then denied Putrabali’s appeal from the enforcement decision.

Putrabali argued that Rena Holding violated the obligation to act in good faith and acted in abuse of right because the first award was replaced by a second award, which deprived it of all legal effect before the French court was seized, that the rule according to which the annulment of an award in a foreign state does not affect the enforcement of the award in France was not applicable here, that only the second award could be properly called an “award” and is the only one that could be subject to enforcement, and that recognition and forced execution of the replaced award was against the parties’ intentions and violated international public policy.

However, the French Court of Cassation confirmed the Court of Appeal’s decision and granted enforcement of the award.

The court reasoned that an international arbitral award is independent of a national legal order and its validity was to be ascertained by the laws of the country where enforcement is sought, in this case France.

Article VII of the New York Convention allowed Rena Holding to seek enforcement of the award as French rules do not refuse enforcement of an award by reason of its annulment at the seat of the arbitration.

Download the PDF file .

Filed Under: Annulment of Arbitration Award, Arbitration Award, Arbitration Jurisdiction, Arbitration Procedure, Arbitration Rules, Court of Arbitration, Enforcement of Arbitration Award, France Arbitration, International Arbitration Law, International Court Of Justice, London Arbitration, New York Convention

Search Arbitration Information

Hong Kong Sets Aside USD 481.6 Million Award: The Duty to Address the Defence Actually Advanced

Banesco v. Panama: ICSID Jurisdiction, Foreign-Controlled Companies and Regulatory Ambiguity

Perjury and False Evidence in International Arbitration

Andraous v. Netherlands: Share Ownership, Employment Rights and the Definition of an Investment

NBA Arbitration: A Player’s Guide to Protecting Your Contract, Compensation, and Career

Legacy Vulcan, LLC v. United Mexican States: Regulatory Arbitrariness and the Limits of Investment Treaty Compensation

DIFC Court of Appeal Sets Aside DIAC Award for Procedural Unfairness in Oheo Bank v Parker [2025] DIFC CA 006

Can Arbitrators Ask Artificial Intelligence for Its View on Legal Issues?

Security for Costs in Investment Arbitration

Behind the Curtain: A Step-by-Step Guide to LCIA Arbitration

Behind the Curtain: A Step-by-Step Guide to SIAC Arbitration under the 2025 Rules

Who Bears Responsibility for AI in Arbitration? The EU AI Act and the Role of Arbitral Institutions

Foreign-Seated Corporate Arbitration Clauses in Italian Companies

No Easy Exit from an Arbitral Award

© 2012-2026 · IA