A Greek shipowner obtains in London, at the end of an arbitration conducted under the terms of the London Maritime Arbitrators Association, an award ordering a Marseille charterer to pay USD 1.8 million in demurrage. The charterer does not pay. It has nothing in England: its bank accounts are in Marseille, its customers are French, and one of the ships it charters calls at Fos every fortnight. The award is worth nothing until it crosses the Channel. The question is therefore not who is right, since the arbitrators have said so, but how long it will take to turn that title into money.
The answer is reassuring. French international arbitration law is among the most welcoming in the world for a foreign award, and deliberately so.
French law, more favourable than the New York Convention
France and the United Kingdom are both parties to the New York Convention of 10 June 1958 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. But Article VII of that Convention allows the party relying on an award to invoke the law of the country where enforcement is sought, where that law is more favourable. French law is.
Under Article 1514 of the French Code of Civil Procedure, an award is recognised or enforced in France if its existence is established by the party relying on it and if recognition or enforcement is not manifestly contrary to international public policy. Two conditions, nothing more. The judge does not retry the case, does not check the demurrage calculation, does not verify that the arbitrators applied the right law.
The Cour de cassation took that logic to its conclusion in a case that also arose from a London award: an international award, it held, is not anchored in any national legal order, and French law does not treat the setting aside of the award in its country of origin as a ground for refusing enforcement (first civil chamber, 29 June 2007, No. 05-18.053, Putrabali). The practical consequence, which still surprises many English practitioners: a debtor who obtained the setting aside of the award before the High Court would not thereby have closed the door to enforcement in France.
An application, not a lawsuit
Exequatur of an award made abroad falls within the jurisdiction of the Paris Judicial Court (Article 1516 of the Code of Civil Procedure). The procedure is ex parte: the creditor files an application with the court registry, and the debtor is neither summoned nor heard. The file is short. The existence of the award is established by producing the original together with the arbitration agreement, or copies satisfying the conditions required for their authenticity, with a translation where those documents are not in French (Article 1515).
That last point is where maritime files most often stumble, because the arbitration agreement in a voyage charter is rarely a single document signed by both parties: it is a clause of the standard form charterparty, amended by rider clauses, sometimes no more than a reference in a fixture recap exchanged by email between two brokers who never printed a page, and yet it is that agreement which must be produced before the Paris Judicial Court, in a form whose authenticity cannot be disputed, with a translation where the charterparty is in English, which it almost always is, having checked along the way that the version produced is the one the arbitrators relied on, since an attentive debtor will not fail to compare. A well-prepared file is won there, far more than in the drafting of the application.
What the debtor can still raise
Once the exequatur order is made, the creditor serves it together with the award, and the debtor then has one month from service to appeal (Article 1525), a short period that forces it to gather within weeks any evidence that it never consented to arbitration. The Court of Appeal may refuse exequatur only in the five cases listed in Article 1520: the tribunal wrongly upheld or declined jurisdiction, it was improperly constituted, it ruled without complying with its mandate, due process was not respected, or recognition of the award is contrary to international public policy.
The list is closed. Anything that touches the merits is lost in advance.
In practice, only one of those grounds carries real weight in maritime disputes: the tribunal’s lack of jurisdiction, where the debtor argues it never agreed to arbitrate. That is the case of a consignee faced with a charterparty arbitration clause through a mere incorporation wording in the bill of lading, or of a group company that never signed the contract and is nonetheless ordered to pay by the award. That debate is prepared before the application, not after the appeal.
Above all, the appeal does not stay enforcement (Article 1526). The First President, sitting in summary proceedings, or the pre-trial judge once seised, may stop or adjust enforcement, but only if enforcement is liable to cause serious harm to the rights of one of the parties. The creditor can therefore attach the debtor’s bank accounts while the debtor litigates.
Secure first, enforce next
The exequatur period is not dead time. Any person whose claim appears well founded in principle may apply to the judge for leave to carry out a conservatory arrest of a ship (Article L. 5114-22 of the French Transport Code), and an arbitral award, even before exequatur, makes the claim more than plausible. If the debtor owns the ship that calls at Fos, an arrest obtained within hours detains it until security is provided. That is often the moment, rather than before the Court of Appeal, when the case settles.
Provided, of course, that the ship belongs to the debtor. A time charterer does not own the ship it operates, and arresting that ship for its debt raises specific questions.
What changes on 1 January 2027
Decree No. 2026-741 of 6 August 2026 rewrites part of Book IV of the Code of Civil Procedure. For the exequatur of awards made abroad, the new Articles 1515, 1516, 1525 and 1526 apply to awards made after 1 January 2027. The scheme does not move: same court, ex parte application, appeal within one month of service, five grounds for refusal, no suspensive effect. Production of a copy of the award replaces production of the original. No decision has yet been given under the new texts, and we are reasoning here on their wording.
What we check first
- The arbitration agreement: where it appears, who signed it, how it was transmitted, in what form it can be produced.
- The award: copy or certified copy, date, translation to be prepared.
- The debtor’s assets in France: bank accounts, receivables from French customers, ships it owns and their port calls.
- Whether an immediate conservatory measure is warranted, even before the exequatur application.
- Any challenge brought in London, which does not block enforcement in France but bears on strategy.
For our work on these matters, see International maritime lawyer in France, Ship arrest and Exequatur in Paris.
On the same subject: Enforcing an ICC arbitral award, in France and abroad; Exequatur of an arbitral award in France: petition, documents, challenges; English maritime judgments: enforcement in France after Brexit.
This analysis is part of the firm’s work in maritime law.
Frequently asked questions
Can an award made in London be enforced in France if it has been set aside in England?
Yes. French law does not treat the setting aside of the award in its country of origin as a ground for refusing enforcement (Cour de cassation, first civil chamber, 29 June 2007, No. 05-18.053). The French judge checks only that the award exists and is not manifestly contrary to international public policy.
Is the debtor heard before exequatur is granted?
No. The exequatur procedure is ex parte: the creditor files an application with the Paris Judicial Court. The debtor may then appeal within one month of service of the order, and the appeal does not stay enforcement.
Can a ship be arrested in France before exequatur is obtained?
Yes. A conservatory arrest of a ship is open to any person whose claim appears well founded in principle (Article L. 5114-22 of the French Transport Code). It secures the claim while exequatur proceedings are pending.