Source: https://library.iccwbo.org/content/dr/COUNTRY_ANSWERS/CA_SUPP_0029_79.htm?l1=Country+Answers&l2=Venezuela
Timestamp: 2019-09-23 07:53:29
Document Index: 400410861

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art. 1', 'Art. 1977', 'Art. 1977', 'Art. 48', 'Art. 312', 'Art. 48', 'Art. 48', 'Art. 48', 'Art. 48', 'Art. 48', 'Art. 13', 'Art. 185', 'Art. 24', 'Art. 29', 'Art. 33', 'Art. 49', 'Art. 47']

Ramon Escovar Alvarado
The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (Venezuela).
9 May 1995.
(Source: Official Gazette No 4.832, 29 Dec.1994, 'NYC Approval Law'.)
(Source: NYC Approval Law exception, section a.)
(Source: NYC Approval Law exception, section b.)
In Venezuela, there are two categories of law applicable to the recognition and enforcement of foreign awards: (i) international law, which basically includes international conventions; (ii) internal municipal law, which includes the Commercial Arbitration Law of 1998.
(Source: Commercial Arbitration Law, Official Gazette No 36.430, 7 Apr. 1998 ('Arbitration Law').)
The Arbitration Law is applicable when (i) there is no international convention tying Venezuela to the country where the award was made in effect at the time of enforcement of the award or (ii) the Arbitration Law is necessary to fill a gap in an international convention.
(Source: Arbitration Law, Art. 1.)
The Arbitration Law contains the rules of procedure for the enforcement of an international award.
(Source: Arbitration Law, Arts. 48, 49.)
According to the Venezuelan Supreme Court, when there is more than one convention applicable to a particular award, the provisions of the most favorable convention for the recognition and enforcement of an award should be applied. This means that the application of one convention does not exclude the other conventions.
(Source: Supreme Court of Justice, Political-Administrative Chamber, 9 Oct. 1997, Embotelladora Caracas C.A. and others v. Pepsi Cola Panamérica S.A., reported in Jurisprudencia Ramírez & Garay, Vol. CXLV, 1997, p. 648.)
Neither the Arbitration Law nor the Code of Civil Procedure contains specific provisions setting a time limit for filing an application for the recognition of a foreign award. In the Civil Code there is such a time bar.
(Source: Civil Code, Art. 1977 (see answer to Q.6(b) below).)
Under Art. 1977 of the Civil Code, the limitation period for requesting enforcement of an executory judgment, and thus of a foreign award, is 10 years from the date on which the parties are notified that the award has been rendered. This is the same as for regular judgments rendered by a court of ordinary jurisdiction in Venezuela.
The first instance mercantile court with jurisdiction at the place where enforcement is sought.
(Source: Arbitration Law, Art. 48.)
The Arbitration Law simply requires an application for recognition and enforcement of the foreign award. There is no requirement under the Arbitration Law that the party against whom enforcement is sought be domiciled in the territory over which the court has jurisdiction, nor does the party requesting recognition of the foreign award have to show that there are assets located within the jurisdiction of the court. This broad approach of the law seems to allow forum shopping by the party seeking enforcement of an
Always inter partes. The other party must have an opportunity to object to recognition.
The Venezuelan Supreme Court has held, in the case of national (as opposed to international) awards, that the decision of the first instance court granting or denying recognition cannot be appealed and thus is final.
(Sources: Supreme Court, 8 Feb. 2002, Hanover P.G.N. Compressor, C.A. v. COSA and CONVECA; 14 Aug. 2004, Promotora E.P. 1697, C.A. v. Asociación Civil El Carrao; 9 Nov. 2004, Operaciones FF v. Valores Venafin; June 2006, Tensaven and Anclajes Venezolanos v. Giovanni Boldrin.)
This holding applies also to international arbitrations. However, some Venezuelan commentators consider that a decision that rejects recognition of an award can be appealed (to a superior court) and that cassation can be requested in the Supreme Court.
(Source: Ricardo Henríquez la Roche, El Arbitraje Comercial en Venezuela (Caracas: Centro de Arbitraje de la Cámara de Comercio de Caracas, 2002) p. 325.)
It is argued that recognition of an award would otherwise be left solely in the hands of the first instance court. This argument has not been recognized by the courts in Venezuela.
If one accepts that a judgment granting or denying the recognition of an award is subject to appeal, the appeal is brought before the superior court of the relevant jurisdiction. Recourse against the decision of the superior court is available in the cassation chamber of the Supreme Court.
This appeal process results from an interpretation of the Arbitration Law, which states that recognition and enforcement of an award is accomplished through the procedure used for enforcing judgments under the Code of Civil Procedure.
The rules for enforcing judgments under the Code of Civil Procedure allow for recourse against the decision of the superior court by way of cassation.
(Source: Code of Civil Procedure, Art. 312.)
Once the award has been recognized.
In Venezuela, as in the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, recognition and enforcement run together.
The only evidence that must be presented to Venezuelan courts is a copy of the award.
(Source: Arbitration Law, Art. 48 (see Q.8 above).)
The requirement under the Arbitration Law is less complex and more favorable to enforcement of the award than the requirements contained in certain international conventions applicable in Venezuela, including the New York Convention. Under the holding in Pepsi Cola (see Q.5 above), where there is a conflict between several rules, the rule most favorable to recognition of the award should be used.
The New York Convention requires a party seeking recognition of a foreign award to present an original of the award in addition to an original of the agreement to arbitrate or a copy that has been properly authenticated. This requirement is not applicable in Venezuela since the provisions of the Arbitration Law are more favorable to the enforcement of awards.
(Sources: Arbitration Law, Art. 48; New York Convention, Art. VII.)
The full text of the award must be presented.
(Source: Arbitration Law, Art. 48, 2d para.)
The award must be certified as true and correct by the arbitral tribunal.
One certified copy.
(Source: Arbitration Law, Art. 48 2d para.)
Yes. Nevertheless, the party requesting recognition may request the court to return the original award after recognition has become final.
(Source: Code of Civil Procedure, Arts. 24, 25.)
Spanish ('castellano').
(Sources: Arbitration Law, Art. 48; Civil Code, Art. 13).
(c) Is it necessary for the translations to be certified and, if yes, by whom (by an official or sworn translator or by a diplomatic or consular agent (of which country) or by some other person)?
Yes, by a certified public interpreter, properly certified in Venezuela. The interpreter's signature must be notarized.
(Source: Code of Civil Procedure, Art. 185.)
The complete text of the award must be translated.
Yes, by application of the New York Convention (Art. VI).
In principle, there are no other grounds in the law for suspending recognition and enforcement of a foreign award in Venezuela. Nevertheless, in certain isolated cases, Venezuelan courts have suspended the enforcement of an award where there was a motion for a constitutional stay (amparo). The argument used to request an amparo is that enforcement of the foreign award could violate the constitutional rights of one of the Venezuelan parties affected by the award. This was the case in the constitutional stay of a partial interim award granted in Consorcio Barr v. Four Seasons. A similar line was taken in Todosabor S.A. v. Häagen-Dazs Shoppe Company Inc.
(Sources: Supreme Court, Constitutional Chamber, 19 Nov. 2004, Consorcio Barr v. Four Seasons, reported in Jurisprudencia Ramírez & Garay, Vol. CCXVII, 2004, No. 2261-04; Supreme Court, Constitutional Chamber, 14 Feb. 2006, Häagen-Dazs Shoppe Company Inc. v. Todosabor, reported in Jurisprudencia Ramírez & Garay, Vol. CCXXX, p. 346.)
In addition, there is a more recent precedent in the decision of the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Judicial Court of 30 Nov. 2011 in the case of Van Raalte de Venezuela C.A. v. Bienes y Raíces Austra C.A. This decision excludes the possibility of filing a writ of cassation against decisions of the Superior Court on the setting aside of an award. However, it allows a party to request an amparo pending review of the constitutionality of the setting aside of an award. The holding in Van Raalte could be extended to the enforcement of foreign awards, opening the possibility of a review by the Constitutional Chamber of a superior court's decision on an appeal against a request for enforcement of a foreign award.
(Source: Supreme Court, Constitutional Chamber, 30 Nov. 2011, Van Raalte de Venezuela C.A. v. Bienes y Raíces Austra C.A.)
Under Art. VI of the New York Convention, the court where the request for recognition and enforcement has been filed can require suitable security. This discretion granted to the court is not in the Arbitration Law.
All documents filed in a court are part of the public record.
(Source: Code of Civil Procedure, Arts. 24, 25, 110.)
The Code of Civil Procedure establishes that all files in a civil procedure are public. Therefore, steps cannot be taken to make a file confidential unless the court considers that the information could offend public decency or decorum. However, it would be very strange for there to be an issue of decorum or decency in an international commercial arbitration.
(Source: Code of Civil Procedure, Art. 24.)
No, unless the hearing could offend public decency or decorum (see Q.15(a) above).)
All judgments are public. They are not necessarily published except for those picked up by court reporters. There are no steps available for removing the names of the parties.
Venezuelan law does not provide a definition of interim or partial award. In principle, an award that is partial or interim would be subject to recognition and enforcement. The award must be in writing, signed by the majority of the arbitrators, reasoned and must state the place of arbitration.
(Source: Arbitration Law, Arts. 29, 30.)
However, there is ambiguity in Venezuelan law over the very possibility of an arbitral tribunal issuing a partial or interim award. Art. 29 of the Arbitration Law provides that an arbitration procedure shall terminate at the time an award is rendered, without distinguishing between the interim, partial or final nature of the award. On the other hand, Art. 33 of the Arbitration Law provides that the tribunal's jurisdiction ceases once a final award is rendered, thus implying that an interim or partial award does not terminate the arbitration procedure.
The award must be recognized in its entirety. Enforcement can be limited to parts.
Never. Recognition and enforcement of an award will be refused if the award has been declared void or suspended by a competent authority.
(Source: Arbitration Law, Art. 49(e).)
The competent authority to set aside an award would be a court in the country where the award was rendered.
(Source: Arbitration Law, Art. 47.)
Other contributor: