Respondent argued against the confirmation of the arbitral award as it was based upon the consent of the parties, rather than a disputed hearing, which it contended made the award not subject to the New York Convention, resulting in a lack of jurisdiction. The Court disagreed that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction, citing to Albtelecom SH.A. v. UNIFI Commc'ns, Inc., 2017 WL 2364365 (S.D.N.Y. May 30, 2017). The court noted that "[w]hile the tribunal did not make findings or reach legal conclusions, it made an award that bound parties, with its power. No binding or persuasive statutory language or case law requires a court to hold that a tribunal must reach its own conclusions, separate from the parties' agreement, to make a valid binding award subject to the Convention."
As Respondent did not argue that the award should not be confirmed on any ground but lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, the Court found the award must be confirmed.
Transocean Offshore Gulf of Guinea VII Ltd., et al. v. Erin Energy Corp., No. H-17-2623 (USDC S.D. Tex. Mar. 12, 2018)/p>
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.