{"id":288933,"date":"2026-01-19T16:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-01-19T15:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/?p=288933"},"modified":"2026-01-19T15:47:20","modified_gmt":"2026-01-19T14:47:20","slug":"averda-v-gabon-neutralising-corruption-without-annulment-before-the-paris-court-of-appeal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/2026\/01\/19\/averda-v-gabon-neutralising-corruption-without-annulment-before-the-paris-court-of-appeal\/","title":{"rendered":"Averda v. Gabon: Neutralising Corruption Without Annulment Before the Paris Court of Appeal"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h1 class=\"wp-block-heading has-text-align-center\">Paris Court of Appeal, 28 October 2025, No 23\/16145, <em>R\u00e9publique Gabonaise<\/em><\/h1>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>THE AUTHOR<\/strong>:<br><strong>Elisa-Marie Goubeau<\/strong>, Intern at <a href=\"https:\/\/jusconnect.com\/en\/d\/profile\/firm\/stephens-chu-dispute-resolution\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\"><strong>Stephens-Chu Dispute Resolution<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:30px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-text-align-center wp-block-paragraph\"><em><a href=\"https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/paris-baby-arbitration\/posts\/?feedView=all\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">Paris Baby Arbitration (&#8220;PBA&#8221;)<\/a> is building a strong community of future arbitration professionals linked to Paris and beyond. Partnering with\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Daily Jus<\/a>, PBA shares sharp, bilingual analyses and fresh perspectives on the developments shaping the arbitration field, making it more accessible to students and young practitioners worldwide.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:10px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-atbs-tabs atbs-tabs-4bb57021 atbs-tabs-9cbcaeaa atbs-tabs-21dd8cd7 atbs-tabs-dea9df16 atbs-tabs-ffa1c9f5 atbs-tabs-507cfc7d atbs-tabs-aa15e4c5 atbs-tabs-4e71e07f atbs-tabs-960ca043 atbs-tabs-ee00a60a atbs-tabs-cc044763 atbs-tabs-e5227453 atbs-tabs-28ee9d1e atbs-tabs-0f9baf1e atbs-tabs-089ca7bc atbs-tabs-d3e0c47d atbs-tabs-6f4e5034 atbs-tabs-edc4d811 atbs-tabs-9f79343d atbs-tabs-e29c0043 atbs-tabs-3388e41b atbs-tabs-eacf5739 atbs-tabs-1640bf1d atbs-tabs-f4af3a56 atbs-tabs-873c354e atbs-tabs-83bd85a4 atbs-tabs-62375cc4 atbs-tabs-5956dcf8\"><div class=\"tabs-container\"><div class=\"tabs-nav\"><ul class=\"tabs-titles\"><li class=\"tab-title icon_left\" data-title-tab-id=\"1\" role=\"button\"><span class=\"tab-title-text\">English<\/span><\/li><li class=\"tab-title icon_left\" data-title-tab-id=\"2\" role=\"button\"><span class=\"tab-title-text\">French<\/span><\/li><\/ul><\/div><div class=\"tabs-content\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-atbs-tab\"><div class=\"single-tab\" data-tab-id=\"1\" data-tab-parent-id=\"atbs-tabs-4bb57021\">\n<div style=\"height:30px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/fr-averda-environmental-services-gabon-s-a-v-gabonese-republic-clean-africa-and-others-arret-de-la-cour-d-appel-de-paris-pole-5-chambre-16-23-16145-tuesday-28th-october-2025\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">28 October 2023<\/a>, the Paris Court of Appeal dismissed an application to set aside an ICC arbitral award on grounds of violation of international public policy in <em>Averda v. Gabon and others<\/em>. This case raised sensitive issues relating to corruption in the performance of public contracts and the scope of international public policy review exercised by the French annulment judge.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The dispute arose out of the performance of three contracts (the\u201c<strong>Contracts<\/strong>\u201d) concluded in December 2014 between Averda Environmental Services Gabon S.A. (\u201c<strong>Averda Gabon<\/strong>\u201d, or the \u201c<strong>Claimant<\/strong>\u201d) and several Gabonese public entities, among which the Republic of Gabon and two other municipalities (the \u201c<strong>Respondents<\/strong>\u201d, or the \u201c<strong>Applicants<\/strong>\u201d). The Contracts concerned the Gabonese government\u2019s engagement in 2014 of Averda Gabon, a local subsidiary of a Dubai-headquartered waste management company, to provide waste management and street-cleaning services in Libreville, the country\u2019s capital.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In August 2019, Averda Gabon suspended its services, citing persistent payment delays. In June 2020, Averda Gabon subsequently initiated <a href=\"https:\/\/jusconnect.com\/en\/d\/profile\/institution\/en-icc-international-chamber-of-commerce\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">ICC (International Chamber of Commerce)<\/a> arbitration on the basis of the arbitration clause enshrined in the Contracts, seeking payment of invoices of approximately $34 million. During the arbitration procedure, Respondents advanced allegations of corruption and fraudulent practices in the performance of the Contracts by Claimant. More precisely, they alleged that corruption had permeated their execution through:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>a payment of bribes to a Gabonese public official;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>the establishment of a system of false invoicing designed to generate cash for the payment of illicit remuneration; and<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>the concealment of financial information relating to the contractual services.\u00a0<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In its <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/en-averda-v-gabonese-republic-composition-of-the-tribunal#decision_19861?su=%2Fen%2Fsearch%3Fquery%3D23%2F16145%26lang%3Den\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">Award of 23 August 2023<\/a>, the Arbitral Tribunal held that the evidence revealed serious, precise, and consistent <em>indicia<\/em> of corruption affecting the performance of part of the contracts, but not their formation.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On the basis of Article 1520(5) of the French Code of Civil Procedure, Respondents filed an application to set aside the Award on the ground that its recognition and enforcement would be contrary to international public policy, in light of corruption established in the performance of the Contracts. The Applicants contended that, despite expressly acknowledging the existence of corrupt practices, the Arbitral Tribunal nevertheless ordered payments that would allow Averda Gabon to benefit from Contracts tainted by corruption. More precisely, Respondents argued that the Arbitral Tribunal had acknowledged its inability to distinguish between tainted and untainted invoices. According to the Applicants, enforcement of this Award would therefore give effect to corruption in breach of fundamental principles of international public policy.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Averda Gabon opposed such an application, recalling that under Article 1520(5) of the French Code of Civil Procedure, the annulment judge cannot review the merits of the award, but must assess whether its recognition or enforcement would result in a characterised violation of French international public policy.&nbsp; Furthermore, Averda Gabon argued that the Tribunal had applied a rigorous methodology aiming to fully neutralise any potential effects of corruption by following the methodology of the Applicants\u2019 own expert. Such methodology excluded all amounts corresponding to services considered tainted by corruption, and applied a 35% reduction to account for degraded cleaning services, and to ensure that Averda Gabon derived no benefit from the alleged misconduct.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The legal issues before the Court of Appeal were therefore whether:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ol start=\"1\" class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The recognition or enforcement of an arbitral award acknowledging corruption in the performance of a contract necessarily violates international public policy; and\u00a0<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Whether, in the circumstances of the case, the enforcement of the award would allow a party to benefit from the proceeds of corruption in violation of international public policy within the meaning of Article 1520(5) of the French Code of Civil Procedure.\u00a0<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Court recalled that the prohibition of corruption is a fundamental principle of French international public policy, and that the annulment judge must verify the concrete effects of enforcing the Award within the French legal order. However, the Court also emphasised that it is not the role of the annulment judge to review the merits of the Award, nor to rule on criminal liability, but solely to assess whether enforcement would undermine the fight against corruption.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Applying this framework, the Court noted that the parties did not dispute the existence of corruption in the execution of certain services, but disagreed on the consequences to be drawn from it. The Court observed that corruption concerned only the&nbsp;performance, and not the&nbsp;formation of the Contracts, and that a substantial part of the services had been effectively performed. Crucially, the Court underlined that the Arbitral Tribunal had conducted a&nbsp;detailed factual analysis&nbsp;and had applied the&nbsp;most conservative reduction rate<strong>,<\/strong> expressly to ensure that Averda would derive&nbsp;no benefit&nbsp;from corrupt practices.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Court therefore concluded that enforcement of the award would&nbsp;not give effect to corruption, nor would it undermine the objectives of international public policy. As no&nbsp;characterised violation&nbsp;of international public policy was established, the application to set aside the award was dismissed in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This decision is significant as it further illustrates the&nbsp;nuanced and pragmatic approach&nbsp;of the Paris Court of Appeal to corruption-related challenges. While reaffirming that corruption falls squarely within the scope of international public policy, the Court confirms an increasingly clear trend: the mere allegation or even the establishment of corruption is no longer sufficient in itself to justify setting aside an arbitral award.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Instead, the decisive question remains whether the arbitral tribunal has sufficiently addressed and neutralised its effects, so that enforcement of the award does not allow any party to benefit from illicit conduct. Therefore, this ruling reinforces France\u2019s&nbsp;arbitration-friendly yet principled&nbsp;approach, providing guidance on how arbitral tribunals may deal with corruption allegations without undermining the enforceability of their awards.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:30px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"has-text-align-center wp-block-paragraph\">T<em>his article was originally published in the Biberon Newsletter on <em>Wednesday January 8, 2026,<\/em> with thanks to Paris Baby Arbitration, Jus Mundi &amp; Jus Connect<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-buttons is-content-justification-center is-layout-flex wp-container-core-buttons-is-layout-fe48e5de wp-block-buttons-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-button\"><a class=\"wp-block-button__link wp-element-button\" href=\"https:\/\/pbarbitration.fr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/BIBERON-82-ENG.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><strong>Read It<\/strong> <strong>Here<\/strong><\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>ABOUT THE AUTHOR<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Elisa-Marie Goubeau<\/strong> is a French trainee lawyer (EFB) and an intern at <a href=\"https:\/\/jusconnect.com\/en\/d\/profile\/firm\/stephens-chu-dispute-resolution\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\"><strong>Stephens-Chu Dispute Resolution<\/strong><\/a>.\u00a0 She holds a Master 1 degree in International and European Law from the Catholic University of Lille and an Advanced LL.M. in International Dispute Settlement and Arbitration from Leiden University.\u00a0 Elisa-Marie gained experience with international arbitral institutions, including the <a href=\"https:\/\/jusconnect.com\/en\/d\/profile\/institution\/en-icc-international-chamber-of-commerce\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">ICC (International Chamber of Commerce)<\/a> in Paris and the <a href=\"https:\/\/jusconnect.com\/en\/d\/profile\/institution\/en-kcab-korean-commercial-arbitration-board\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">KCAB (Korean Commercial Arbitration Board)<\/a> in Seoul, as well as with boutique law firms specialized in international arbitration in Paris. She took part in the Willem C. Vis Moot Court as a team member and as a student coach. She is also a member of Paris Baby Arbitration since 2021, contributing to its monthly newsletter. She works in French and English and also speaks Spanish and Korean.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">*<em><em>The&nbsp;views&nbsp;and opinions expressed by authors are theirs and do not necessarily reflect those of their organizations, employers, or Daily Jus, Jus Mundi, or Jus Connect.<\/em><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-atbs-tab\"><div class=\"single-tab\" data-tab-id=\"2\" data-tab-parent-id=\"atbs-tabs-4bb57021\">\n<h1 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Affaire <em>Averda c. Gabon<\/em> : corruption et ordre public international sans annulation de la sentence <\/strong><\/h1>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:10px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Cour d\u2019appel de Paris, 28 octobre 2025, n\u00ba 23\/16145, <em>R\u00e9publique Gabonaise<\/em><\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:30px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Par un arr\u00eat du <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/fr-averda-environmental-services-gabon-s-a-v-gabonese-republic-clean-africa-and-others-arret-de-la-cour-d-appel-de-paris-pole-5-chambre-16-23-16145-tuesday-28th-october-2025\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">28 octobre 2025<\/a>, la Cour d\u2019appel de Paris a rejet\u00e9 un recours en annulation form\u00e9 contre une sentence arbitrale CCI, fond\u00e9 sur une pr\u00e9tendue violation de l\u2019ordre public international dans l\u2019affaire <em>Averda c. R\u00e9publique Gabonaise<\/em>. L\u2019affaire soulevait des questions sensibles relative \u00e0 la corruption dans l\u2019ex\u00e9cution de contrats publics et \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e9tendue du contr\u00f4le exerc\u00e9 par le juge fran\u00e7ais de l\u2019annulation au regard de l\u2019ordre public international.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Le litige trouve son origine dans l\u2019ex\u00e9cution de&nbsp;trois contrats (\u00ab&nbsp;<strong>les Contrats<\/strong>&nbsp;\u00bb)&nbsp;conclus en d\u00e9cembre 2014 entre&nbsp;Averda Environmental Services Gabon S.A.&nbsp;(\u00ab <strong>Averda Gabon<\/strong> \u00bb, ou la \u00ab&nbsp;<strong>Demanderesse&nbsp;<\/strong>\u00bb) et plusieurs personnes publiques gabonaises, dont la&nbsp;R\u00e9publique Gabonaise&nbsp;(\u00ab <strong>D\u00e9fenderesses <\/strong>\u00bb, ou les \u00ab&nbsp;<strong>Demanderesses au recours<\/strong>&nbsp;\u00bb). Les Contrats portaient sur la fourniture de&nbsp;services de gestion des d\u00e9chets et de nettoyage des voies publiques, par&nbsp;Averda Gabon, filiale locale d\u2019un groupe de gestion des d\u00e9chets dont le si\u00e8ge est situ\u00e9 \u00e0&nbsp;Duba\u00ef, dans le cadre d\u2019un march\u00e9 conclu en&nbsp;2014 avec l\u2019\u00c9tat gabonais&nbsp;pour la prestation de ces services dans la&nbsp;capitale du pays, Libreville.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">En ao\u00fbt 2019, Averda Gabon a suspendu l\u2019ex\u00e9cution de ses prestations en raison de\u00a0retards de paiement persistants<strong>, <\/strong>avant d\u2019initier, en juin 2020, une proc\u00e9dure d\u2019arbitrage <a href=\"https:\/\/jusconnect.com\/en\/d\/profile\/institution\/en-icc-international-chamber-of-commerce\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">CCI<\/a> sur le fondement des clauses compromissoires, sollicitant le paiement de factures impay\u00e9es d\u2019un montant approximatif de 34 millions de dollars. Au cours de la proc\u00e9dure arbitrale, les D\u00e9fenderesses ont invoqu\u00e9 l\u2019existence de\u00a0faits de corruption et de pratiques frauduleuses\u00a0dans l\u2019ex\u00e9cution des contrats. Elles soutenaient plus pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment que la corruption aurait impr\u00e9gn\u00e9 leur ex\u00e9cution par\u00a0:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>le\u00a0versement de pots-de-vin \u00e0 un agent public gabonais\u00a0;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>la\u00a0mise en place d\u2019un syst\u00e8me de fausses facturationsdestin\u00e9 \u00e0 g\u00e9n\u00e9rer des liquidit\u00e9s servant au paiement de r\u00e9mun\u00e9rations occultes\u00a0;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>ainsi que la\u00a0dissimulation d\u2019informations financi\u00e8res\u00a0relatives aux prestations contractuelles.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Par une\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/en-averda-v-gabonese-republic-composition-of-the-tribunal#decision_19861?su=%2Fen%2Fsearch%3Fquery%3D23%2F16145%26lang%3Den\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">sentence arbitrale du 23 ao\u00fbt 2023<\/a>, le Tribunal Arbitral a retenu que les \u00e9l\u00e9ments vers\u00e9s aux d\u00e9bats r\u00e9v\u00e9laient un\u00a0faisceau d\u2019indices graves, pr\u00e9cis et concordants de corruption\u00a0affectant l\u2019ex\u00e9cution d\u2019une partie des Contrats, sans toutefois affecter leur\u00a0formation.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Sur le fondement de l\u2019article 1520, 5\u00b0 du Code de proc\u00e9dure civile, les D\u00e9fenderesses ont form\u00e9 un recours en annulation, soutenant que la reconnaissance et l\u2019ex\u00e9cution de la sentence seraient contraires \u00e0 l\u2019ordre public international. Elles faisaient valoir que, bien que le Tribunal Arbitral ait express\u00e9ment constat\u00e9 l\u2019existence de faits de corruption, il avait n\u00e9anmoins ordonn\u00e9 des paiements permettant \u00e0 Averda Gabon deb\u00e9n\u00e9ficier de contrats entach\u00e9s de corruption. Elles soulignaient en particulier que le Tribunal aurait reconnu son impossibilit\u00e9 de distinguer avec pr\u00e9cision les factures corrompues des factures non entach\u00e9es, de sorte que l\u2019ex\u00e9cution de la sentence donnerait n\u00e9cessairement effet \u00e0 la corruption, en violation de principes fondamentaux de l\u2019ordre public international.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Averda Gabon s\u2019est oppos\u00e9e au recours, rappelant que le juge de l\u2019annulation n\u2019a pas vocation \u00e0&nbsp;r\u00e9viser la sentence au fond, mais uniquement \u00e0 appr\u00e9cier si sa reconnaissance ou son ex\u00e9cution entra\u00eene une&nbsp;violation \u00ab&nbsp;<em>de mani\u00e8re caract\u00e9ris\u00e9e<\/em>&nbsp;\u00bb de l\u2019ordre public international fran\u00e7ais. Elle soutenait en outre que le Tribunal Arbitral avait appliqu\u00e9 une&nbsp;m\u00e9thodologie rigoureusedestin\u00e9e \u00e0&nbsp;neutraliser int\u00e9gralement les effets potentiels de la corruption, en suivant la m\u00e9thode propos\u00e9e par l\u2019expert des Demanderesses au recours. Cette m\u00e9thodologie avait conduit \u00e0 l\u2019exclusion des montants correspondant aux prestations entach\u00e9es de corruption et \u00e0 l\u2019application d\u2019un&nbsp;taux de r\u00e9faction de 35 %<strong>,<\/strong> afin de tenir compte de la d\u00e9gradation des prestations de nettoiement et de s\u2019assurer qu\u2019Averda Gabon ne tire aucun b\u00e9n\u00e9fice des faits all\u00e9gu\u00e9s.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Les questions juridiques soumises \u00e0 la Cour d\u2019appel de Paris \u00e9taient d\u00e8s lors de savoir :<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ol style=\"list-style-type:lower-roman\" class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>si la reconnaissance ou l\u2019ex\u00e9cution d\u2019une sentence arbitrale constatant des faits de corruption dans l\u2019ex\u00e9cution d\u2019un contrat viole n\u00e9cessairement l\u2019ordre public international ; et<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>si, l\u2019ex\u00e9cution de la sentence permettait \u00e0 une partie (la D\u00e9fenderesse au recours) de b\u00e9n\u00e9ficier du produit de la corruption en violation de l\u2019ordre public international au sens de l\u2019article 1520, 5\u00b0 du Code de proc\u00e9dure civile.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">La Cour a rappel\u00e9 que laprohibition de la corruption&nbsp;constitue un principe fondamental de l\u2019ordre public international fran\u00e7ais et que le juge de l\u2019annulation doit appr\u00e9cier les&nbsp;effets concretsde l\u2019ex\u00e9cution de la sentence dans l\u2019ordre juridique fran\u00e7ais. Elle a toutefois soulign\u00e9 qu\u2019il ne lui appartenait ni de revoir le fond de la sentence, ni de se prononcer sur une \u00e9ventuelle responsabilit\u00e9 p\u00e9nale, mais uniquement de v\u00e9rifier si l\u2019ex\u00e9cution de la sentence serait de nature \u00e0&nbsp;entraver l\u2019objectif de lutte contre la corruption.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Appliquant ce cadre d\u2019analyse, la Cour a relev\u00e9 que les parties ne contestaient pas la caract\u00e9risation de faits de corruption dans l\u2019ex\u00e9cution de certaines prestations, mais divergeaient quant aux cons\u00e9quences \u00e0 en tirer. Elle a constat\u00e9 que les faits de corruption all\u00e9gu\u00e9s n\u2019affectaient que l\u2019ex\u00e9cution, et non la&nbsp;formation, des Contrats, et qu\u2019une part substantielle des prestations avait effectivement \u00e9t\u00e9 r\u00e9alis\u00e9e. Surtout, la Cour a soulign\u00e9 que le Tribunal Arbitral avait proc\u00e9d\u00e9 \u00e0 une&nbsp;analyse factuelle approfondie&nbsp;et retenu le&nbsp;taux de r\u00e9faction le plus strict, pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment afin de s\u2019assurer qu\u2019Averda Gabon ne tire aucun b\u00e9n\u00e9fice des pratiques corruptives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">La Cour en a d\u00e9duit que l\u2019ex\u00e9cution de la sentence ne donnait pas effet \u00e0 la corruption et ne portait pas atteinte \u00e0 l\u2019ordre public international. En l\u2019absence de violation caract\u00e9ris\u00e9e de celui-ci, le recours en annulation a \u00e9t\u00e9&nbsp;rejet\u00e9 dans son int\u00e9gralit\u00e9<strong>.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Cet arr\u00eat illustre de mani\u00e8re significative l\u2019approche&nbsp;nuanc\u00e9e et pragmatique&nbsp;de la Cour d\u2019appel de Paris en mati\u00e8re de corruption. Tout en r\u00e9affirmant que la corruption rel\u00e8ve pleinement de l\u2019ordre public international, la Cour confirme une tendance d\u00e9sormais bien \u00e9tablie :&nbsp;la seule all\u00e9gation, voire la constatation, de faits de corruption ne suffit plus, en elle-m\u00eame, \u00e0 justifier l\u2019annulation d\u2019une sentence arbitrale. L\u2019enjeu d\u00e9cisif demeure de savoir si le tribunal arbitral a correctement&nbsp;trait\u00e9 et neutralis\u00e9 les effets de la corruption, de sorte que l\u2019ex\u00e9cution de la sentence ne permette \u00e0 aucune partie de tirer profit d\u2019un comportement illicite. La d\u00e9cision apporte ainsi des enseignements pr\u00e9cieux aux tribunaux arbitraux confront\u00e9s \u00e0 des all\u00e9gations de corruption, en leur indiquant comment traiter et neutraliser leurs effets sans porter atteinte \u00e0 l\u2019effectivit\u00e9 et \u00e0 la force ex\u00e9cutoire de leurs sentences arbitrales. <strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:30px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"has-text-align-center wp-block-paragraph\"><em><em>Cet article a \u00e9t\u00e9 initialement publi\u00e9 dans la newsletter Biberon le jeudi 8 janvier, 2026, avec le soutien de Paris Baby Arbitration, Jus Mundi &amp; Jus Connect<\/em><\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-buttons is-content-justification-center is-layout-flex wp-container-core-buttons-is-layout-fe48e5de wp-block-buttons-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-button\"><a class=\"wp-block-button__link wp-element-button\" href=\"https:\/\/pbarbitration.fr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/BIBERON-82-FR.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><strong>Lire dans le Biberon<\/strong><\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:30px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>ABOUT THE AUTHOR<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Elisa-Marie Goubeau<\/strong> is a French trainee lawyer (EFB) and an intern at <a href=\"https:\/\/jusconnect.com\/en\/d\/profile\/firm\/stephens-chu-dispute-resolution\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\"><strong>Stephens-Chu Dispute Resolution<\/strong><\/a>.\u00a0 She holds a Master 1 degree in International and European Law from the Catholic University of Lille and an Advanced LL.M. in International Dispute Settlement and Arbitration from Leiden University.\u00a0 Elisa-Marie gained experience with international arbitral institutions, including the <a href=\"https:\/\/jusconnect.com\/en\/d\/profile\/institution\/en-icc-international-chamber-of-commerce\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">ICC (International Chamber of Commerce)<\/a> in Paris and the <a href=\"https:\/\/jusconnect.com\/en\/d\/profile\/institution\/en-kcab-korean-commercial-arbitration-board\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">KCAB (Korean Commercial Arbitration Board)<\/a> in Seoul, as well as with boutique law firms specialized in international arbitration in Paris. She took part in the Willem C. Vis Moot Court as a team member and as a student coach. She is also a member of Paris Baby Arbitration since 2021, contributing to its monthly newsletter. She works in French and English and also speaks Spanish and Korean.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">*<em><em>Les points de vue et les opinions exprim\u00e9s par les auteurs sont les leurs et ne refl\u00e8tent pas n\u00e9cessairement ceux de leurs organisations, de leurs employeurs ou de Daily Jus, Jus Mundi ou Jus Connect.<\/em><\/em><\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Paris Court of Appeal confirms that established corruption does not automatically justify annulment where an arbitral tribunal has effectively neutralised its effects.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":288935,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jnews-multi-image_gallery":[],"jnews_single_post":{"subtitle":"","format":"standard","video":"","gallery":"","source_name":"","source_url":"","via_name":"","via_url":"","override_template":"0","override":[{"template":"custom","single_blog_custom":"274736","parallax":"1","fullscreen":"1","layout":"right-sidebar","sidebar":"author","second_sidebar":"default-sidebar","sticky_sidebar":"1","share_position":"hide","share_float_style":"share-monocrhome","show_share_counter":"0","show_view_counter":"0","show_featured":"1","show_post_meta":"1","show_post_author":"0","show_post_author_image":"0","show_post_date":"1","post_date_format":"default","post_date_format_custom":"Y\/m\/d","show_post_category":"0","show_post_reading_time":"0","post_reading_time_wpm":"300","show_zoom_button":"0","zoom_button_out_step":"2","zoom_button_in_step":"3","show_post_tag":"0","show_prev_next_post":"0","show_popup_post":"0","number_popup_post":"1","show_author_box":"0","show_post_related":"0","show_inline_post_related":"0"}],"override_image_size":"0","image_override":[{"single_post_thumbnail_size":"crop-500","single_post_gallery_size":"crop-500"}],"trending_post":"0","trending_post_position":"meta","trending_post_label":"Trending","sponsored_post":"0","sponsored_post_label":"Sponsored by","sponsored_post_name":"","sponsored_post_url":"","sponsored_post_logo_enable":"0","sponsored_post_logo":"","sponsored_post_desc":"","disable_ad":"0"},"jnews_primary_category":{"id":"179","hide":""},"jnews_social_meta":{"fb_title":"Averda v. Gabon: Neutralising Corruption Without Annulment Before the Paris Court of Appeal","fb_description":"The Paris Court of Appeal confirms that established corruption does not automatically justify annulment where an arbitral tribunal has effectively neutralised its effects.","fb_image":"288936","twitter_title":"Averda v. Gabon: Neutralising Corruption Without Annulment Before the Paris Court of Appeal","twitter_description":"The Paris Court of Appeal confirms that established corruption does not automatically justify annulment where an arbitral tribunal has effectively neutralised its effects.","twitter_image":"288936"},"jnews_review":[],"enable_review":"0","type":"percentage","name":"","summary":"","brand":"","sku":"","good":[{"good_text":""}],"bad":[{"bad_text":""}],"score_override":"0","override_value":"","rating":[{"rating_text":"","rating_number":"10"}],"price":[{"shop":"","price":"","link":"","icon":""}],"jnews_override_counter":{"override_view_counter":"0","view_counter_number":"0","override_share_counter":"0","share_counter_number":"0","override_like_counter":"0","like_counter_number":"0","override_dislike_counter":"0","dislike_counter_number":"0"},"footnotes":""},"categories":[205,167,179,208,188,276,161,247],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-288933","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-arbitration","category-europe","category-france","category-investor-state-arbitration","category-legal-insights","category-paris-baby-arbitration-pba","category-world","category-worldwide-perspectives"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/288933","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=288933"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/288933\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":289087,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/288933\/revisions\/289087"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/288935"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=288933"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=288933"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=288933"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=288933"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}