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 / William Kirtley and Zuzana Vysudilova Publish Article on Violations of International Public Policy

William Kirtley and Zuzana Vysudilova Publish Article on Violations of International Public Policy

09/04/2018 by International Arbitration

William Kirtley and Zuzana Vysudilova have published a new article on violations of international public policy under French law, in light of the Paris Court of Appeal’s test in the case Société MK Group c/ S.A.R.L. Onix et Société Financial Initiative. Published by LexisNexis UK, the article discusses the test prior to 2014, when French courts required a violation of international public policy to be ‘flagrant, effective and concrete‘ with the new test, which merely requires a violation of international public policy to be ‘manifest, effective and concrete’.

In practice, while the ‘manifest‘ criterion still ensures that it will be difficult to overturn an arbitration award in France on the basis of international public policy, the abandonment of the ‘flagrancy‘ criterion does increase the possibility of the French Court of Appeals overturning an arbitration award when the evidence favours such an outcome.

Filed Under: Aceris Law, Annulment of Arbitration Award, France Arbitration

Search Arbitration Information

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

Investment Arbitration: The Case Against a Standing Investment Court

Saudi Arbitration: What the 2026 SCCA Country Report Shows

© 2012-2026 · IA