This Country Answer reflects the state of the law as of 18 July 2008. Please refer to the explanations in the chapter entitled Disclaimer and Preliminary Note.

A. The Contracting State and the New York Convention

1. Name of Contracting State (also specify jurisdiction(s), if relevant)

Federal Republic of Germany.

2. Date of entry into force of the New York Convention

28 September 1961.

(Source: Gesetz vom 15. März 1961 zum Übereinkommen über die Anerkennung und Vollstreckung ausländischer Schiedssprüche vom 10 Juni 1958, BGBl. 1961 II S. 123; notification of entry into force in Federal Gazette: Bekanntmachung vom 23. März 1962, BGBl. 1962 II S. 102.)

3. Has any reservation been made under Art. I(3) of the New York Convention regarding:

(a) reciprocity

Reservation withdrawn on 31 August 1998.

(b) commercial relationships

No.

4. In addition to arbitral awards made in the territory of another State, the New York Convention (Article I(1)) also applies to arbitral awards not considered as domestic awards in the State where recognition and enforcement are sought. Are there any awards rendered in your country that are not considered as domestic awards such that the New York Convention and the answers to this Questionnaire are applicable to them?

No.

B. Nationals of law

5. What specific sources of law are applicable to recognition and enforcement of foreign awards (e.g. statutes, regulations, codes, directives, other legal instruments)?

Federal law: §§1061-1065, Code of Civil Procedure (Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO)), published as a consolidated version BGBl 2005 I S. 3202; the New York Convention itself as incorporated into German federal law by Gesetz vom 15. März 1963 zum Übereinkommen über die Anerkennung und Vollstreckung ausländischer Schiedssprüche vom 10. Juni 1958, BGBl 1961 II S. 121.

State law: Recognition and enforcement, like civil procedure as a whole, is generally governed by federal law . State law is only relevant in this regard where federal legislation empowers the states (Länder) to legislate. In relation to arbitration, this has occurred only for minor issues, such as the possibility for the states to designate a Higher Regional Court (Oberlandesgericht (OLG)) with exclusive jurisdiction over certain arbitration matters within that state (see ZPO, § 1065 V). One example is in Bavaria (Freistaat Bayern): § 8, Verordnung über gerichtliche Zuständigkeiten im Bereich des Staatsministeriums der Justiz vom 16. November 2004 (GZVJu), GVBl. 2004 S. 471. Each of the other German states has similar regulations transferring jurisdiction to render court decisions in arbitral matters to a specific court, usually the Higher Regional Court in the state/district in question.

An application for a declaration of enforceability (Vollstreckbarerklärung, ZPO, § 1061 II) of the award need be made only once; there is no need for actions in several states. Actual enforcement (execution against assets) is achieved by application to the competent execution authority; competence usually depends on the location of assets.

C. Limitation periods (time limits)

6. (a) Is there a limitation period (time limit) applicable to the commencement of legal proceedings for recognition and enforcement of foreign awards?

(b) If yes, what is the applicable limitation period (time limit) and when does it start running?

No. However, if the limitation period for setting aside the award at the seat of the arbitration has expired, it will not be possible to resist an application to enforce the award Germany

(Source: judgment of the Federal Court (Bundesgerichtshof (BGH))-BGH NJW 1984, 2763-which has been criticized by academics and in other cases but was followed by the Oberlandesgericht in Frankfurt-OLG Ffm RIW 89, 912.)

D. National courts and court proceedings

7. What authority or court has jurisdiction over recognition and enforcement of foreign awards?

In principle, the Oberlandesgericht in the district where the respondent has (i) its seat, (ii) its usual place of business, (iii) an asset, or (iv) where the object of the arbitral award is located; or the Kammergericht (appeal court for the district of Berlin) if none of (i)-(iv) is in Germany. In certain states large enough to have more than one Oberlandesgericht, jurisdiction over all applications is concentrated in one Oberlandesgericht (e.g. the Oberlandesgericht in Munich for Bavaria). In order to improve efficiency and expertise, some states have also concentrated jurisdiction in one senate (standing tribunal of three judges) of the appeal court (in Hessen, the 26th Civil Senate of the Oberlandesgericht in Frankfurt, which is presided over by the President of the Oberlandesgericht; in Bavaria, the 34th Civil Senate of the Oberlandesgericht in Munich).

8. What requirements, if any, must be met for the authority or court to accept jurisdiction over recognition and enforcement of foreign awards (e.g. domicile or assets of respondent in the jurisdiction, etc.)?

No jurisdictional requirements except for competence ratione loci (see Q.7 above). Note that if (i)-(iv) of Q.7 above do not apply, the German courts will still accept jurisdiction as the applicant could file in the Kammergericht. If, however, the law at the place of arbitration requires formal recognition, registration or a similar procedure, this must be obtained before the German court will determine the application for recognition or enforcement.

9. Is the first decision granting or denying recognition and enforcement obtained through ex parte or inter partes proceedings?

Generally, inter partes proceedings, in which the respondent will be given the opportunity to be heard.

(Source: ZPO, § 1063(1) sentence 2.)

However, the presiding judge can grant interim enforcement, without hearing the opposing party, until a decision on the request for enforcement has been reached. The opposing party may prevent this by providing security to cover the amount of the enforcement.

(Source: ZPO, § 1063(3).)

10.

(a) Is the first decision granting or denying recognition and enforcement subject to any form of appeal or recourse?

Yes.

(Source: see Rechtsbeschwerde pursuant to ZPO, § 1065, read together with § 574 et seq.)

(b) How many levels of appeal or recourse are available against this decision?

Only one, to the Bundesgerichtshof.

11. What is the earliest stage in legal proceedings for enforcement of foreign arbitral awards at which a party can obtain execution against assets (i.e. party actually obtains possession of assets as opposed to simply freezing assets)?

After (i) the Oberlandesgericht has issued a decision granting enforcement of the award (or has issued a decision granting interim enforcement of the award); (ii) a certified copy of this decision has been obtained for purposes of enforcement; and (iii) the decision has been notified to the debtor. However, so long as recourse remains possible (see Q.10 above), enforcement will be subject to reimbursement in the event the recourse succeeds and will usually require security to be provided.

E. Evidence required

12.

(a) What evidence must be supplied for recognition and enforcement of foreign awards (e.g. arbitral award, contract containing arbitration clause, affidavits, witness statements, etc.)?

The original or a duly authenticated copy of the award (counsel for the applicant may authenticate the copy).

(b) Is it necessary to provide the entire document or only certain parts (e.g. entire contract or only arbitration clause)?

In its entirety.

(c) Are originals or duly certified copies required?

Yes, see (a) above.

(d) How many originals or duly certified copies are required?

Strictly speaking only one, it is practice, however, to provide four copies (one copy for the respondent and copies for the three judges sitting in the Oberlandesgericht).

(e) Does the authority or court keep the originals that are filed?

Yes.

13.

(a) Is it necessary to provide a translation of the documents supplied?

Translation is not a mandatory requirement for the request to be admissible but the court may request one; it is practice to provide translations into German in any event, if applicable.

(Source: Bayerisches Oberstes Landesgericht, BayObLG, RIW 2001, 140.)

(b) If yes, into what language?

Into German.

(c) Is it necessary for the translations to be certified and, if yes, by whom (official or sworn translator or diplomatic or consular agent (of which country?) or some other person)?

No.

(d) Is it necessary to provide a full translation of the documents or only a translation of certain parts (e.g. entire award or only part setting forth the decisions; entire contract or only arbitration clause)?

It may be pleaded to the court that a partial translation suffices (e.g. operative part of the award), see (a) above.

F. Stay of enforcement

14.

(a) Can the authority or court stay legal proceedings for recognition and enforcement pending the outcome of an application to set aside or suspend the foreign award before the competent authority referred to in Art. V(1)(e) of the New York Convention?

Yes, but only if the respondent can persuade the court that the setting aside proceedings are likely to be successful. If the application to set aside is successful in the jurisdiction where the award was rendered, the respondent may apply for reconsideration of enforcement if it has already been granted.

(b) On what other grounds, if any, can the authority or court stay legal proceedings for recognition and enforcement (e.g. forum non conveniens)?

None.

(c) Is the granting of a stay of legal proceedings for recognition and enforcement conditional on the provision of security?

No.

G. Confidentiality

15. (a) Do the documents filed in legal proceedings for recognition and enforcement form part of the public record? If yes, can any steps be taken to preserve the confidentiality of such documents?

The public does not have access to documents in the record.

(b) If there are hearings on recognition and enforcement, are such hearings confidential? If not, can steps be taken to maintain the confidentiality of the legal proceedings?

In principle, the hearings are public. Access to the hearings may be restricted for reasons of (i) business secrets, (ii) where protection of the particular individual interests is considered to be more important than the general public interest in open hearings or (iii) public order. But these exceptions are handled with great caution as they touch on the constitutional right to public justice.

(Source: Law on judicial organization (Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz (GVG), § 172.)

(c) Are judgments on recognition and enforcement published? If yes, can steps be taken to remove the names of the parties or avoid publication of confidential information (such as business or State secrets)?

Publication by the court is possible, but names will in this case systematically be removed.

H. Other issues

16. When, if ever, can a party obtain recognition and enforcement of interim or partial foreign awards?

Interim and partial awards can in principle be enforced, if the decision affects the substantive rights of the parties to the dispute. Mere provisional measures ordered by an arbitral tribunal cannot be enforced.

17. When, if ever, can a party obtain recognition and enforcement of non-monetary relief in foreign arbitral awards (e.g. order requiring a party to deliver up share certificates or other property)?

Awards providing for non-monetary relief can be enforced unless incompatible with public policy (e.g. if it would be a criminal offence to perform the action granted as relief in the award).

18. When, if ever, can a party obtain recognition and enforcement of only part of the relief granted in foreign awards?

Partial enforcement is possible in general. The law expressly mentions the possibility of partial enforcement with regard to monetary obligations, for example

(Source: ZPO, § 752.)

19. When, if ever, can a party obtain recognition and enforcement of foreign awards which have been set aside by the competent authority referred to in Art. V(1)(e) of the New York Convention?

This question is debated in Germany. Most commentators regard an award that was set aside by the competent authorities at its the seat as unenforceable. However, a strong minority argues that it would be unacceptable to bow automatically to a decision to set aside, to the detriment of the winning party, without having an opportunity to review whether the decision to set aside was made in accordance with fundamental procedural guarantees.

20. Are there any other procedural or practical requirements relating to recognition and enforcement of foreign awards which are worth mentioning (e.g. unusually high court costs, filing fees, stamp duties, obligation to post security as a condition for seeking recognition and enforcement, obligation to identify the assets that will be the object of enforcement, etc.)?

No.

Country Rapporteur: Robert Hunter.

Other contributor: Patricia Nacimiento, Mariel Dimsey.