{"id":3954,"date":"2016-06-30T16:03:51","date_gmt":"2016-06-30T20:03:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/nyiac.org\/?p=3954"},"modified":"2016-06-30T16:03:51","modified_gmt":"2016-06-30T20:03:51","slug":"case-law-chronicle-6-enforcing-awards-against-non-signatories-and-non-parties-two-recent-decisions-from-the-southern-district-of-new-york","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nyiac.org\/legal-developments\/case-law-chronicle-6-enforcing-awards-against-non-signatories-and-non-parties-two-recent-decisions-from-the-southern-district-of-new-york\/","title":{"rendered":"Case Law Chronicle #6: Enforcing Awards Against Non-Signatories and Non-Parties: Two Recent Decisions from the Southern District of New York"},"content":{"rendered":"
By Gretta Walters, Chaffetz Lindsey LLP <\/strong><\/p>\n In two recent decisions, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York addressed key issues arising out actions to enforce foreign arbitral awards against non-signatories to an arbitration agreement. The decisions, Alstom Brasil Energia e Transporte Ltda. v. v. Mitsui Sumitomo Seguros S.A.1 and GE Transportation (Shenyang) Co., Ltd. v. A-Power Energy Generation Systems, Ltd.,2 demonstrate that confirmation and enforcement actions in New York are relatively streamlined and that the court will only undertake a limited review of arbitration awards as required by the New York Convention and the FAA. In addition, GE Transportation, in particular, is a reminder that New York courts are willing, where appropriate, to order effective interim or permanent relief in aid of post-award collection, such as worldwide freezing orders.<\/p>\n