9 U.S.C. § 305
Relationship between the Inter-American Convention and the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of June 10, 1958
Section effective upon the entry into force of the Inter-American Convention on International Commercial Arbitration of
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28
cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1992–2025 · leading case: Corporación Mexicana De Mantenimiento Integral v. Pemex-Exploración Y Producción
Corporación Mexicana De Mantenimiento Integral v. Pemex-Exploración Y Producción (2016)
“” 9 U.S.C. § 305 (1). . The Restatement of Foreign Relations Law also espouses this view.”
Goldgroup Resources v. Dynaresource De Mexico (2021)
“See 9 U.S.C. § 305 . It also incorporates by reference nearly all the substantive provisions of the New York Convention.”
Johnson Controls, Incorporated v. Edman Controls, Incorporated (2013)
“If it is the former, then the New York Convention applies; if the latter, then pursuant to 9 U.S.C. § 305 , the Panama Convention governs.”
Four Seasons Hotels & Resorts, B v. v. Consorcio Barr, S.A. (2003)
“9 U.S.C. § 305 (2002). Venezuela is a party to the Inter-American Convention.”
Pine Top Receivables of Illinois, LLC v. Banco De Seguros Del Estado (2014)
“9 U.S.C. § 305 . Thus, the present case is governed by the Panama Convention.”
Republic of Ecuador v. ChevronTexaco Corp. (2005)
“§ 301 note, so that “a majority of the parties are citizens of a State or States that have ratified or acceded to the Inter-American Convention and are member States of the Organization of American States,” 9 U.S.C.A. § 305 , and thus that Convention rather than the New York…”
TermoRio S.A. E.S.P. v. Electranta S.P. (2007)
“See 9 U.S.C. § 305 (1). However, codification of the Panama Convention incorporates by reference the relevant provisions of the New York Convention (see 9 U.”
Nicor International Corp. v. El Paso Corp. (2003)
“In a case where a majority of the parties to an arbitration agreement are citizens of a nation or nations that have ratified the Inter-American Convention, the Inter-American Convention shall apply and trumps the New York Convention, 9 U.S.C. § 305 . In this case, the only…”
Corporación Mexicana de Mantenimiento Integral, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. PEMEX-Exploración y Producción (2013)
“See 9 U.S.C. § 305 ; John Bowman, The Panama Convention and its Implementation Under the Federal Arbitration Act, 11 Am.”
Energy Transport, Ltd. v. M v. San Sebastian (2004)
“See 9 U.S.C. § 305 . The parties to the Charter, ETL and Oilmar, hail from the United States and Panama, respectively, both of which are signatories to the Inter-American Convention and members of the Organization of American States.”
Employers Insurance of Wausau v. Banco De Seguros Del Estado (1999)
“See 9 U.S.C. § 305 . However, as we discuss below, the provisions of both conventions are interpreted to reach the same result in each case, and, lacking knowledge of *942 the signatory status of the home states of the remaining retrocessionaires, the parties have stipulated…”
Figueiredo Ferraz Consultoria E Engenharia De Projeto Ltda. v. Republic of Peru (2009)
“” See 9 U.S.C. § 305 (1) (“If a majority of the parties to the arbitration agreement are citizens of a State or States that have ratified or acceded to the Inter-American Convention and are member States of the Organization of American States, the Inter-American Convention shall…”
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.