The portability of international arbitral awards is one of the reasons why arbitration is used to settle international business disputes. Under the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the New York Convention), the prevailing party in arbitration may seek to enforce a qualifying award before the courts of any of the 156 signatory countries. Such procedures are intended to be a powerful tool in the hands of an award creditor, theoretically enabling collection from the assets of the award debtor in nearly any country.
In theory, such actions are limited only by the grounds for non-enforcement listed in Article V of the New York Convention. In the United States, however, actions to confirm foreign arbitral awards are also subject to constitutional due process limitations on personal jurisdiction. These can be significant, since the underlying awards in such actions often concern disputes among foreign parties relating to foreign subject matter—the connection to the enforcement state is frequently slight. And while personal jurisdiction could previously be grounded on the award debtor’s non-dispute-related business contacts with the forum state, such ties are no longer sufficient following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Daimler AG v. Bauman, 134 S. Ct. 746 (2014).
