Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Interpretation and Application of the New York Convention in the Republic of Austria

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards

Part of the book series: Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law ((GSCL,volume 23))

  • 1946 Accesses

Abstract

The New York Convention is part of Austrian law and fully applied by Austrian courts. This chapter addresses certain salient interpretation and application questions faced by Austrian courts when dealing with recognition and enforcement proceedings of foreign arbitral awards under the Convention.

Dr. Nikolaus Pitkowitz is founding partner and head of dispute resolution and real estate at Graf & Pitkowitz.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 269.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 349.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 499.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Austrian Supreme Court of August 30, 1995, docket no. 3 Ob 1075/95.

  2. 2.

    Hausmaninger in Fasching/Konecny, Zivilprozessgesetze2, § 606 ZPO mn 45.

  3. 3.

    N Pitkowitz, Die Aufhebung von Schiedssprüchen (Manz Verlag, Wien 2008) mn 28; S Riegler in S Riegler, A Petsche, A Fremuth-Wolf , M Platte, C Liebscher (eds), Arbitration Law of Austria: Practice and Procedure (Juris Net, 2007) § 606 ZPO mn 16.

  4. 4.

    M Platte in S Riegler, A Petsche, A Fremuth-Wolf , M Platte, C Liebscher (eds), Arbitration Law of Austria: Practice and Procedure (Juris Net, 2007) § 593 ZPO mn 13.

  5. 5.

    Austrian Supreme Court of April 28, 1931 docket no. 2 Ob 388/31.

  6. 6.

    For a comprehensive list of all relevant bilateral and multilateral agreements signed by Austria see Liebscher in Weigand, Practitioner’s Handbook on International Commercial Arbitration (Second Edition, 2009) mn 2.285 et seq. and Hausmaninger in Fasching/Konecny, Zivilprozessgesetze2, § 577 ZPO mn 36 et seq.

  7. 7.

    Domestic arbitral awards (i.e. such rendered by an arbitral tribunal with its seat in Austria) constitute executory titles eo ipso pursuant to Section 1 no. 16 of the Austrian Enforcement Act. Thus, there is no need for separate exequatur proceedings.

  8. 8.

    Jakusch in Angst, Exekutionsordnung2, § 79 EO mn 5 et seq.

  9. 9.

    Hausmaninger in Fasching/Konecny, Zivilprozessgesetze2, § 577 ZPO mn 36 et seq.

  10. 10.

    N Pitkowitz, “Is There Still a Scope of Application of the European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration?”

    the European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration?” in Zeiler, Welser, et al. (ed), Austrian Yearbook on International Arbitration (Manz’sche Verlags- und Universitätsbuchhandlung, 2013) 93.

  11. 11.

    Hausmaninger in Fasching/Konecny, Zivilprozessgesetze2,, § 606 ZPO mn 37.

  12. 12.

    W. H. Rechberger in C Liebscher, P Oberhammer, W. H. Rechberger (eds), Schiedsverfahrensrecht Band I (Springer, 2011) mn 6/30 et seq.

  13. 13.

    W. H. Rechberger in C Liebscher, P Oberhammer, W. H. Rechberger (eds), Schiedsverfahrensrecht Band I (Springer, 2011) mn 6/65 et seq; A Fremuth-Wolf in S Riegler, A Petsche, A Fremuth-Wolf, M Platte, C Liebscher (eds), Arbitration Law of Austria: Practice and Procedure (Juris Net, 2007) § 578 mn 22 et seq; Zeiler, Schiedsverfahren 2, § 578 mn 4. For a dissenting opinion see Hausmaninger in Fasching/Konecny, Zivilprozessgesetze 2,, § 578 ZPO mn 19 et seq.

  14. 14.

    Austrian Supreme Court of January 1, 2005 docket no. 3 Ob 221/04b; Austrian Supreme Court of August 24, 2011 docket no. 3 Ob 65/11x. See also Zeiler, Schiedsverfahren 2, § 614 mn 18.

  15. 15.

    Austrian Supreme Court of October 20, 2004 docket no. 3 Ob 73/04p.

  16. 16.

    Austrian Supreme Court of January 26, 2005 docket no. 3 Ob 221/04b;

  17. 17.

    See N Pitkowitz, Die Aufhebung von Schiedssprüchen (Manz Verlag, Wien 2008) mn 131; Hausmaninger in Fasching/Konecny, Zivilprozessgesetze 2, § 611 ZPO mn 255; Zeiler, Schiedsverfahren2, § 611 mn 54.

  18. 18.

    Hausmaninger in Fasching/Konecny, Zivilprozessgesetze 2, § 611 ZPO mn 256.

  19. 19.

    See Nacimiento in Kronke et al (ed), Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, (Kluwer Law International, 2010) 216; Borris/Hennecke in Wolff (ed), New York Convention, Article V mn 71; Czernich, New York Convention (2008), Art V mn 7.

  20. 20.

    Austrian Supreme Court of March 30, 2009 docket no. 7 Ob 266/08f. See also N Pitkowitz, Die Aufhebung von Schiedssprüchen (Manz Verlag, Wien 2008) mn 7; Hausmaninger in Fasching/Konecny ,Zivilprozessgesetze2, § 581 ZPO mn 284.

  21. 21.

    See N Pitkowitz in Ostrove/Salomon/Shifman (ed), Choice of Venue in International Arbitration (2013), mn 20.26.

  22. 22.

    Austrian Supreme Court of April 26, 2006 docket no. 7 Ob 236/05i.

  23. 23.

    Rechberger, Evergreen: Gültigkeit der Schiedsklausel, in Bachmann et al (ed), FS Schlosser (2005), 733 (737).

  24. 24.

    Oberhammer, Schiedsvereinbarung und § 1016 ABGB, in Fischer-Czermak et al (ed), FS Welser (2004) 759 (761).

  25. 25.

    Austrian Supreme Court of September 24, 1981 docket no. 7 Ob 623/81.

  26. 26.

    Austrian Supreme Court of September 6, 1990 docket no. 6 Ob 572/90.

  27. 27.

    Austrian Supreme Court of November 27, 1991 docket no. 3 Ob 1091/91.

  28. 28.

    Rechberger in Rechberger (ed.), ZPO4 (2014) § 611 mn 5.

  29. 29.

    Austrian Supreme Court of January 13, 1955 docket no. 2 Ob 422/54.

  30. 30.

    Most recently see Austrian Supreme Court of April 24, 2013 docket no. 9 Ob 27/12d.

  31. 31.

    Austrian Supreme Court of June 30, 2010 docket no. 7 Ob 111/10i.

  32. 32.

    Austrian Supreme Court of November 18, 1982 docket no. 8 Ob 520/82; Austrian Supreme Court of January 24, 1968 docket no. 1 Ob 297/67.

  33. 33.

    See N Pitkowitz, Die Aufhebung von Schiedssprüchen (Manz Verlag, Wien 2008) mn 236.

  34. 34.

    Austrian Supreme Court of December 14, 1927 docket no. 1 Ob 1187/27.

  35. 35.

    Austrian Supreme Court of November 18, 1982 docket no. 8 Ob 520/82. See however N Pitkowitz, Die Aufhebung von Schiedssprüchen (Manz Verlag, Wien 2008) mn 235.

  36. 36.

    Austrian Supreme Court of January 23, 1926 docket no. 2 Ob 104/26. This decision is however criticized in literature; see Zeiler, Schiedsverfahren2, § 611 mn 23 and Hausmaninger in Fasching/Konecny, Zivilprozessgesetze2, § 611 ZPO mn 144.

  37. 37.

    See N Pitkowitz, Die Aufhebung von Schiedssprüchen (Manz Verlag, Wien 2008) mn 296 et seqq; S Riegler in S Riegler, A Petsche, A Fremuth-Wolf, M Platte, C Liebscher (eds), Arbitration Law of Austria: Practice and Procedure (Juris Net, 2007) § 611 ZPO mn 61; Hausmaninger in Fasching/Konecny, Zivilprozessgesetze2, § 611 ZPO mn 160 et seqq.

  38. 38.

    Hausmaninger in Fasching/Konecny, Zivilprozessgesetze2, § 611 ZPO mn 157.

  39. 39.

    Austrian Supreme Court of September 30, 1925 docket no. 3 Ob 740/25.

  40. 40.

    Austrian Supreme Court of February 29, 1984 docket no. 2 Ob 516/84.

  41. 41.

    S Riegler in S Riegler, A Petsche, A Fremuth-Wolf , M Platte, C Liebscher (eds), Arbitration Law of Austria: Practice and Procedure (Juris Net, 2007) § 611 ZPO mn 59.

  42. 42.

    Austrian Supreme Court of January 1, 2005 docket no. 3 Ob 221/04b; Austrian Supreme Court of August 24, 2011 docket no. 3 Ob 65/11x. See also Zeiler, Schiedsverfahren2, § 614 mn 18.

  43. 43.

    Austrian Supreme Court of April 16, 2013 docket no. 3 Ob 39/13a.

  44. 44.

    Austrian Supreme Court of January 26, 2005 docket no. 3 Ob 221/04b.

  45. 45.

    See N Pitkowitz, Die Aufhebung von Schiedssprüchen (Manz Verlag, Wien 2008) mn 367 et seq.

  46. 46.

    Though such disputes are generally regarded arbitrable, some specifics are still disputed. Austrian Supreme Court of April 19, 2012 docket no. 6 Ob 42/12p; see in detail N Pitkowitz, The Arbitrability of Corporate Law Disputes in Austria – still open questions? in Zeiler, Welser, et al. (ed), Austrian Yearbook on International Arbitration (Manz’sche Verlags- und Universitätsbuchhandlung, 2014) 31 et seq.

  47. 47.

    See Koller in W. H. Rechberger in C Liebscher, P Oberhammer, W. H. Rechberger (eds), Schiedsverfahrensrecht Band I (Springer, 2011) mn 3/100 et seq.

  48. 48.

    See Koller in W. H. Rechberger in C Liebscher, P Oberhammer, W. H. Rechberger (eds), Schiedsverfahrensrecht Band I (Springer, 2011) mn 3/94 et seq.

  49. 49.

    See Koller in W. H. Rechberger in C Liebscher, P Oberhammer, W. H. Rechberger (eds), Schiedsverfahrensrecht Band I (Springer, 2011) mn 3/104 et seq.

  50. 50.

    Section 582 (2) ZPO.

  51. 51.

    Section 582 (2) ZPO.

  52. 52.

    See Zeiler, Schiedsverfahren2, § 582 mn 20.

  53. 53.

    Disputes between a consumer and an entrepreneur may only be subject to arbitration if the arbitration clause was concluded after the dispute arose (Section 617 ZPO). See most recently Austrian Supreme Court of December 16, 2013 docket no. 6 Ob 43/13m. See in detail Liebscher/Zeiler, Der OGH und § 617 ZPO, ecolex 2014, 425 et seqq. Technically, Section 617 stipulates a requirement for a valid arbitration agreement to be concluded with a consumer and is not a restriction of arbitrability. See Stippl in W. H. Rechberger in C Liebscher, P Oberhammer, W. H. Rechberger (eds), Schiedsverfahrensrecht Band I (Springer, 2011) mn 4/55 et seqq.

  54. 54.

    Austrian Supreme Court of January 26, 2005 docket no. 3 Ob 221/04b.

  55. 55.

    Austrian Supreme Court of October 23, 2002 docket no. 3 Ob 251/02m.

  56. 56.

    See N Pitkowitz, Die Aufhebung von Schiedssprüchen (Manz Verlag, Wien 2008) mn 331 et seq; Hausmaninger in Fasching/Konecny, Zivilprozessgesetze 2, § 611 ZPO mn 172 et seqq.

  57. 57.

    See N Pitkowitz, Die Aufhebung von Schiedssprüchen (Manz Verlag, Wien 2008) mn 403 et seq; S Riegler in S Riegler, A Petsche, A Fremuth-Wolf , M Platte, C Liebscher (eds), Arbitration Law of Austria: Practice and Procedure (Juris Net, 2007) § 611 ZPO mn 93.

  58. 58.

    Austrian Supreme Court of March 21, 2001 docket no. 3 Ob 172/00s.

  59. 59.

    Jakusch in Angst, Exekutionsordnung2, § 83 EO mn 3d.

  60. 60.

    Austrian Supreme Court of August 24, 2011 docket no. 3 Ob 65/11x.

  61. 61.

    Austrian Supreme Court of April 26, 2006 docket no. 3 Ob 211/05h.

  62. 62.

    Austrian Supreme Court of August 24, 2005 docket no. 3 Ob 65/05p.

  63. 63.

    Hausmaninger in Fasching/Konecny, Zivilprozessgesetze2, § 581 ZPO mn 24. See however Quinke in Wolff (ed) New York Convention Commentary (2012), Article VII mn 45, who explicitly confirms this wide application.

  64. 64.

    Hausmaninger in Fasching/Konecny, Zivilprozessgesetze2, § 581 ZPO mn 24.

REFERENCES

  • C Liebscher, P Oberhammer, W. H. Rechberger (eds), Schiedsverfahrensrecht Band I (Springer, 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • N Pitkowitz, Die Aufhebung von Schiedssprüchen (Manz Verlag, Wien 2008).

    Google Scholar 

  • S Riegler, A Petsche, A Fremuth-Wolf, M Platte, C Liebscher (eds), Arbitration Law of Austria: Practice and Procedure (Juris Net, 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  • G Zeiler, Schiedsverfahren 2 (NW Verlag, 2013), §§ 577–618 ZPO.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graf & Pitkowitz Rechtsanwälte GmbH, Stadiongasse 2, A-1010, Wien, Austria

    Nikolaus Pitkowitz

Authors
  1. Nikolaus Pitkowitz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nikolaus Pitkowitz .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Columbia Law School, New York, New York, USA

    George A. Bermann

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pitkowitz, N. (2017). Interpretation and Application of the New York Convention in the Republic of Austria. In: Bermann, G. (eds) Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law, vol 23. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50915-0_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50915-0_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-50913-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-50915-0

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation