Take a Seat: English v French Enforcement Debate Continues as Paris Court of Appeal Rejects English Court’s Reasoning in Kabab-Ji v Kout Food Group

Practical Law Arbitration Blog

14 Jul 2020

Chiraag Shah authored an article for the Practical Law Arbitration Blog covering the opposing decisions between the English and French Courts in the Kabab-Ji v Kout Food Group case.

“The Franchise Development Agreement contained a ‘no oral modification clause’ that the English Court considered relevant to its determination as to whether KFG had been joined as a party to the contract,” the authors wrote. “The Paris Court departed from this strict interpretation, placing reliance instead on the conduct of the parties. The Paris Court also made it clear that it would not be impacted by foreign decisions, noting that it could not ‘be limited by the existence of foreign decisions interpreting the [FDA] and the arbitration clause and applying English law to them.’”

“The English Court of Appeal had already faced some criticism for not awaiting the decision from the Paris Court (being the court of the designated seat of arbitration) when delivering its decision in January 2020,” the authors added. “This conflicting decision will add further fuel to that debate.”

Read the full article. Chiraag also previously covered the English Court of Appeal’s February decision in the case, which addressed the question of what law governs an arbitration agreement in the absence of an express provision.



Unsolicited e-mails and information sent to Morrison & Foerster will not be considered confidential, may be disclosed to others pursuant to our Privacy Policy, may not receive a response, and do not create an attorney-client relationship with Morrison & Foerster. If you are not already a client of Morrison & Foerster, do not include any confidential information in this message. Also, please note that our attorneys do not seek to practice law in any jurisdiction in which they are not properly authorized to do so.