O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 9-9-39 (2019)

When recognition or enforcement of interim measure may be refused

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Recognition or enforcement of an interim measure may be refused only: (1) At the request of the party against whom it is invoked if the court is satisfied that: (A) Such refusal is warranted on the grounds set forth in subparagraphs (a)(1)(A) through (a)(1)(D) of Code Section 9-9-58; (B) The arbitration tribunal’s decision with respect to the provision of security in connection with the interim measure issued by the arbitration tribunal has not been complied with; or (C) The interim measure has been terminated or suspended by the arbitration tribunal or, where so empowered, by the court of the state in which the arbitration takes place or under the law of which that interim measure was granted; or (2) If the court finds that: (A) The interim measure is incompatible with the powers conferred upon the court, unless the court decides to reformulate the interim measure to the extent necessary to adapt it to its own powers and procedures for the purposes of enforcing that interim measure and without modifying its substance; or (B) Any of the grounds set forth in subparagraph (a)(2)(A) or (a)(2)(B) of Code Section 9-9-58 shall apply to the recognition and enforcement of the interim measure. (b) Any determination made by the court on any ground in subsec657

tion (a) of this Code section shall be effective only for the purposes of the application to recognize and enforce the interim measure. Where recognition or enforcement is sought, the court shall not undertake a review of the substance of the interim measure in determining any ground specified in subsection (a) of this Code section.

History

Code 1981, § 9-9-39, enacted by Ga. L. 2012, p. 961, § 1/SB 383.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1990–2017 · leading case: Trend-Pak of Atlanta, Inc. v. Arbor Com. Div., Inc., 397 S.E.2d 592 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990).
Trend-Pak of Atlanta, Inc. v. Arbor Com. Div., Inc., 397 S.E.2d 592 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “Moreover, there is no requirement that the arbitrator’s award include specific findings or reasons absent a request by the parties under OCGA § 9-9-39 (a), or that the award “expressly address each and every issue and collateral issue arising in an arbitration.”
Operations Mgmt. Int'l, Inc. v. City of Forsyth, 654 S.E.2d 438 (Ga. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “9 There is no requirement that the arbitrator’s award include specific findings or reasons absent a request by the parties under OCGA § 9-9-39 (a). Trend-Pak of Atlanta v.”
SCL Basilisk AG v. Agribusiness United Savannah Logistics LLC, 875 F.3d 609 (11th Cir. 2017). “”- Ga. Code Ann. § 9-9-39 (a), (a)(2)(A). If the power of arbitrators and courts to order interim measures were coextensive, this provision would be unnecessary.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.