## Facts

- A German shipping company contracted with a Romanian state shipbuilder for construction of four ships; the ships were not built and disputes arose.
- The dispute went to ICC arbitration in Paris, resulting in a multi-part award for the shipowner totaling several million Deutsche Marks plus interest.
- The Romanian entity sought to annul the award in the Paris Court of Appeal, which dismissed the annulment application.
- Under French procedural law, dismissal of an annulment application automatically conferred *exequatur* on the award, making it executable in France.
- The shipowner first sued in federal court to enforce the arbitral award under the New York Convention; the Second Circuit held that action time-barred and remanded to consider enforcement of the French court ruling under New York’s Uniform Foreign Money-Judgments Recognition Act (CPLR art. 53).
- On remand, the district court treated the French court’s *exequatur*-conferring ruling as a final, conclusive, enforceable foreign country judgment and entered judgment for the amounts due under the award (converted to U.S. dollars) plus interest.
- The Romanian entities appealed, arguing the French ruling was not a “judgment” under CPLR article 53 and raising additional objections concerning jurisdiction, party status, and interest.

## Issues

1. Whether a French appellate ruling dismissing an annulment action and thereby conferring *exequatur* on an arbitral award qualifies as a “foreign country judgment” that is “final, conclusive and enforceable where rendered” under CPLR 5302.
2. Whether enforcing the French ruling under CPLR article 53 improperly circumvents the statute of limitations that barred direct enforcement of the arbitral award under the New York Convention.
3. Whether jurisdictional, successor/alter-ego, and interest-calculation objections precluded entry of judgment.

## Decision

- The Second Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment enforcing the French ruling under CPLR article 53.
- The court held that the French court’s conferral of *exequatur* had the practical effect of a money judgment because it rendered the award executable in France.
- The court rejected the argument that article 53 enforcement impermissibly evaded the Convention limitations bar, distinguishing enforcement of an award from enforcement of a foreign court judgment.
- The court treated earlier rulings on subject-matter and personal jurisdiction and on the relationship between the Romanian entities as controlling and declined to revisit them.
- The court upheld the district court’s conversion of the award into U.S. dollars and its interest award as consistent with enforcing a foreign money judgment.

## Legal Principles

- Under CPLR article 53, a foreign country judgment is enforceable in New York if it is final, conclusive, and enforceable where rendered.
- A foreign court’s ruling that confirms an arbitral award or renders it executory (including by conferring *exequatur*) may be treated functionally as a “foreign country judgment” for recognition and enforcement purposes.
- A creditor may pursue recognition of a foreign court judgment giving effect to an arbitral award under state judgment-recognition law even if direct enforcement of the award under the New York Convention is time-barred, so long as statutory recognition requirements are satisfied.
- When enforcing a recognized foreign money judgment, a court may award interest and convert the judgment amount into U.S. dollars using a reasonable methodology consistent with the enforcement of money judgments.

## Conclusion

The Second Circuit held that a French appellate decision dismissing an annulment challenge and thereby conferring *exequatur* on an arbitral award is enforceable in New York as a foreign money judgment under CPLR article 53, and it affirmed the district court’s judgment awarding the sums due under the award plus interest.


Seetransport Wiking Trader Schiffahrtsgesellschaft MBH & Co. v. Navimpex Centrala Navala, 29 F.3d 79 (2d Cir. 1994)