Will Your Judgment or Arbitral Award Be Enforced Abroad?

Key takeaways

• Think about enforcement first: The right forum depends on where the counterparty’s assets are. A winning judgment or award is only as valuable as your ability to enforce it there.
• Arbitral awards travel well: Awards made in England can usually be enforced in the many countries party to the New York Convention, on limited grounds for refusal.
• Court judgments now travel further: The 2019 Hague Judgments Convention has applied to the UK since 1 July 2025, alongside the 2005 Hague Convention for exclusive choice of court agreements and older bilateral schemes.
• Gaps remain: Where no treaty applies, a judgment may need to be enforced by bringing fresh proceedings in the foreign court, which adds cost and delay.

International contracts often end in a familiar problem. A business wins a dispute in London, but the counterparty has no assets in England. Its money, factories or receivables are in another country, and the local courts must be persuaded to recognise and enforce the English judgment or award. How easy that is depends almost entirely on choices made when the contract was signed.

This article explains how English arbitral awards and court judgments are enforced abroad, how foreign awards and judgments are enforced in England, and what to consider when choosing a forum with enforcement in mind.

How are arbitral awards enforced internationally?

The 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards obliges contracting states to recognise arbitral awards made in other contracting states and to enforce them, subject to a short list of grounds for refusal. The Convention has been very widely adopted, which is one of the main reasons parties choose arbitration for cross-border contracts.

In England, the Convention is given effect by Part III of the Arbitration Act 1996. A New York Convention award may, with the court’s permission, be enforced in the same manner as a judgment, and judgment may be entered in terms of the award (section 101). Under section 103, recognition or enforcement may be refused only if the party resisting enforcement proves one of the listed grounds, such as:

• Invalid agreement. A party lacked capacity, or the arbitration agreement was not valid under the law that governs it.
• Unfair process. The party was not given proper notice of the arbitration or was otherwise unable to present its case.
• Excess of jurisdiction. The award deals with matters outside the submission to arbitration, although valid parts can be severed and enforced.
• Procedural departure. The tribunal or procedure was not in accordance with the parties’ agreement or the law of the seat.
• Status of the award. The award is not yet binding, or has been set aside or suspended by a competent court at the seat.
• Arbitrability and public policy. The subject matter was not capable of settlement by arbitration, or enforcement would be contrary to public policy.

The English courts apply these grounds narrowly, but they take seriously a claim that a party never agreed to arbitrate. In Dallah v Pakistan [2010] UKSC 46, the Supreme Court refused to enforce a French ICC award of more than US$20 million because the Government of Pakistan proved that it was not a party to the arbitration agreement under French law. The tribunal’s own ruling that it had jurisdiction did not bind the English court, which decided the question for itself. In Kabab-Ji SAL v Kout Food Group [2021] UKSC 48, enforcement of a Paris award was also refused because the respondent was held not to be a party to the arbitration agreement, which was governed by English law.

How are English court judgments enforced abroad?

There is no single worldwide regime for court judgments. Whether an English judgment will be enforced depends on the country concerned:

• The 2019 Hague Judgments Convention. The Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters entered into force for the UK on 1 July 2025 and has been implemented in English law by amendments to the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 (2024 Regulations). Its contracting parties include the EU member states and Ukraine. It applies only to judgments given in proceedings commenced after it came into force between the relevant states, so its practical effect will build up over time.
• The 2005 Hague Choice of Court Convention. This applies where the parties have agreed an exclusive choice of court clause in favour of the courts of a contracting state. Judgments given by the chosen court are, in general, to be recognised and enforced in other contracting states. Its contracting parties also include the EU member states.
• Bilateral registration schemes. Judgments of the English courts can be registered in many Commonwealth and other countries under reciprocal arrangements reflected in the Administration of Justice Act 1920 and the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1933.
• No treaty. Elsewhere, the judgment creditor must rely on the foreign country’s own law, which may require fresh proceedings or re-examination of the merits.

Since Brexit, the EU’s Brussels regime no longer applies to UK judgments in new proceedings, and the UK is not a party to the Lugano Convention. For disputes with EU counterparties, the Hague Conventions now carry much of the weight.

How are foreign judgments enforced in England?

The same routes work in reverse. A judgment from a country covered by the 1920 or 1933 Act can be registered in the High Court. Under the 1933 Act, a judgment creditor can apply within six years of the judgment, and once registered the judgment has the same force for enforcement as an English judgment, subject to the debtor’s right to apply to set the registration aside on limited grounds. The 1920 Act requires an application within twelve months, unless the court allows longer. Judgments within the Hague Conventions can be registered under the procedure in the 1982 Act. Otherwise, a foreign money judgment can usually be enforced by bringing a claim in England on the judgment debt.

How should enforcement affect your choice of forum?

The key question is where you may need to enforce. If a counterparty and its assets are in a country that is party to the New York Convention but not to the Hague Conventions or a bilateral scheme with the UK, arbitration will usually offer a clearer route. If the counterparty is in the EU and the contract contains an exclusive English jurisdiction clause, a court judgment may now be enforceable through the 2005 Convention. Where the counterparty’s main assets are in England, enforcement abroad matters less and litigation may be the more economical choice.

Practical steps help too. A parent company guarantee from an entity with assets in a friendly jurisdiction, security over assets, or an escrow arrangement can make enforcement much less important.

Enforcement abroad: a practical checklist

When negotiating a contract with a foreign counterparty, businesses are likely to need to consider:

• Asset location. Where the counterparty’s assets, revenue and parent company are located.
• Treaty coverage. Whether those countries are party to the New York Convention, the 2005 or 2019 Hague Conventions, or a bilateral scheme with the UK.
• Clause type. Whether an exclusive jurisdiction clause or an arbitration clause will give the better enforcement route.
• Correct parties. Making sure the right group entities sign the contract and the arbitration agreement, so enforcement is not resisted on the ground that the respondent never agreed.
• Credit support. Guarantees, security or escrow arrangements that reduce reliance on cross-border enforcement.
• Local advice. Early advice from local counsel on enforcement procedure, timescales and any public policy risks.

At Maybrook Law, we advise on dispute resolution clauses with enforcement in mind, and we act for clients enforcing and resisting arbitral awards and judgments, working with local counsel where assets are abroad. If you are entering into a cross-border contract or need to enforce a judgment or award, we would be pleased to discuss your options.

This article reflects the law as at 9 October 2026. Our insights, articles and guides do not, and are not intended to, constitute legal advice or be an exhaustive review of all legal developments. Although every effort is made to ensure that the information provided in this article is accurate as of the publication date, please be aware that this area of law may be subject to change. Please seek legal advice before applying the information provided to any specific circumstances, transactions or legal issues.