International Arbitration Lawyer in Paris

Paris is one of the three most frequently chosen arbitral seats in the world, and French international arbitration law is known for its liberalism: a deliberately restrained review by the state courts, a far-reaching autonomy of the arbitration agreement and a facilitated enforcement of awards. That framework has just been revised by Decree no. 2026-741 of 6 August 2026, which enters into force on 1 January 2027. The firm assists French and foreign companies in drafting their arbitration clauses, conducting the arbitral proceedings and bringing or defending challenges before the Paris Court of Appeal.

What makes an arbitration international, and why it matters

Article 1504 of the French Code of Civil Procedure adopts a single, purely economic criterion: in the wording in force until 31 December 2026, an arbitration is international when it involves the interests of international trade; from 1 January 2027, the formula becomes “international economic interests”. In both versions, neither the nationality of the parties, nor the place of the seat, nor the law governing the contract plays any part. Two French companies may fall under international arbitration if the disputed transaction involves a movement of goods or funds across borders.

The classification is anything but academic. It governs the applicable regime: a lighter review by the supporting judge, the possibility for foreign parties to waive the action to set aside, and above all a recognition regime for awards that is far more favourable than the one applying to judgments. It is the first check to make in any file, and it is made by looking at the economic transaction, not at the parties’ letterhead.

The supporting judge, and why clauses designate Paris

When the constitution of the arbitral tribunal stalls, when a party refuses to appoint its arbitrator or when an incident threatens the proceedings, the supporting judge (juge d’appui) steps in to unblock the situation without ruling on the merits. In international matters, Article 1505 designates the President of the Paris Judicial Court, unless otherwise agreed, whenever the arbitration takes place in France or the parties have agreed to submit the arbitration to French procedural law. This centralisation partly explains the attractiveness of the seat: a single, experienced interlocutor and a readable body of case law.

Five grounds for setting aside, and nothing else

The action to set aside an award rendered in France is confined to the exhaustive list of Article 1520: jurisdiction wrongly accepted or declined, irregular constitution of the tribunal, disregard of the mandate entrusted to the arbitrators, breach of due process, and recognition or enforcement contrary to international public policy. Five grounds, no others.

None of these grounds allows the merits to be reopened. The party that has lost its arbitration and seeks a ruling that the arbitrators erred in law or in fact has no avenue open, and attempts to dress up a grievance on the merits as a breach of international public policy meet a demanding review. This is the accepted counterpart of choosing arbitration: what is gained in speed and confidentiality is lost in second-tier scrutiny.

The reform of 6 August 2026

Decree no. 2026-741 of 6 August 2026 modernises the whole of arbitral procedure, from the arbitration agreement to the available recourses. Three changes hold practitioners’ attention. The award may now be drawn up in digital form, Article 1480-1 requiring only that the processes used guarantee its integrity and preservation. The evidentiary formalities of exequatur are lightened, Article 1515 abandoning the requirement to produce the original in favour of an authenticated copy. A new Article 1516-1 finally establishes a self-standing route for recognition of the award, distinct from exequatur, whereby the award produces its effects in France without opening the way to compulsory enforcement.

The transitional rules deserve attention, because they vary with the provisions concerned: some apply according to the date the arbitration agreement was concluded, others according to the date the tribunal was constituted, others again according to the date of the award. Thus the new definition of international arbitration in Article 1504 applies where the arbitral tribunal was constituted after 1 January 2027, while the rules on the award and its exequatur concern awards rendered after that date. Proceedings opened in late 2026 may therefore fall simultaneously under the old and the new regime depending on the question at hand.

Typical matters

The situations below are illustrative, anonymised scenarios. They show when the firm steps in and what the work involves.

Pathological arbitration clause

The clause designates a non-existent institution. The firm has the intention to arbitrate acknowledged, seises the closest institution and avoids a jurisdictional dispute.

Interim measure during the arbitration

A counterparty is dissipating its assets during the proceedings. The work bears on a protective attachment before the supporting judge and on its articulation with the arbitral tribunal.

Enforcing an award abroad

An award rendered in Paris must be enforced in Dubai. The firm coordinates recognition under the New York Convention with local counsel.

Without an arbitration clause, or when the award has to be enforced against assets in France, the matter falls under international commercial litigation.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is Paris a seat of arbitration?

Because French arbitration law is favourable to the procedure and the courts that support it are experienced. The supporting judge can be seised quickly to resolve difficulties in constituting the tribunal, the grounds for setting aside an award are limited and exhaustively listed, and an award made in France is not reviewed on the merits. Paris also hosts the International Court of Arbitration of the ICC, and the concentration of counsel and arbitrators is a practical advantage on both cost and time.

How is an arbitration clause drafted?

Briefly and precisely. The clause names the institution and its rules or states that the arbitration is ad hoc, fixes the seat, the number of arbitrators, the language and the law governing the contract, and defines the scope of the disputes referred. It should avoid hybrid formulas combining a court and an arbitral tribunal, which are the main source of clauses held to be pathological. Multi-contract and multi-party situations deserve a specific provision on joinder and consolidation.

How long does an arbitration take, and what does it cost?

Under institutional rules a case commonly runs between eighteen months and three years from the request to the award, and faster under an expedited procedure where the amount in dispute falls below the applicable threshold. The cost has three components: the institution’s administrative fees, the arbitrators’ fees, which follow either a scale based on the amount in dispute or hourly rates depending on the institution, and counsel’s fees, which are usually the largest. The budget is estimated before the request is filed.

Can an award be challenged in France?

An award made in France can be set aside on limited grounds: the tribunal wrongly upheld or declined jurisdiction, it was irregularly constituted, it ruled without complying with its mandate, due process was not respected, or recognition of the award would be contrary to international public policy. The action is brought before the Paris Court of Appeal within the applicable time limit, and there is no review of the merits. Parties with no connection to France may waive that action altogether.

How is an award enforced?

By obtaining an exequatur order from the competent French court on production of the award and of the arbitration agreement, a procedure which is not adversarial at first instance. Abroad, the New York Convention obliges the courts of more than one hundred and seventy States to recognise and enforce the award, subject to the limited grounds of refusal it lists. Enforcement planning starts from the location of the assets, which is also what should guide the choice of clause at the outset.

What can be done urgently before the tribunal is constituted?

Emergency arbitrator procedures exist under most institutional rules and deliver a decision within days on conservatory or interim relief. French courts also retain jurisdiction, before the tribunal is constituted, to order protective and evidential measures, and an arbitration clause does not prevent the attachment of assets or the arrest of a vessel. Choosing between the two routes depends on where the measure has to take effect, since a state court order is enforceable directly against third parties such as banks.