{"id":289414,"date":"2026-03-04T16:31:25","date_gmt":"2026-03-04T15:31:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/?p=289414"},"modified":"2026-03-04T16:31:26","modified_gmt":"2026-03-04T15:31:26","slug":"us-district-court-narrows-public-policy-exception-in-sanctions-context-in-satoriagricultural-v-tr-productions","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/2026\/03\/04\/us-district-court-narrows-public-policy-exception-in-sanctions-context-in-satoriagricultural-v-tr-productions\/","title":{"rendered":"US District Court Narrows Public Policy Exception in Sanctions Context in Satoriagricultural v T&amp;R Productions"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h1 class=\"wp-block-heading has-text-align-center\"><a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/en-tv-novosti-v-t-r-productions-llc-memorandum-and-opinion-of-the-united-states-district-for-the-district-of-columbia-thursday-8th-january-2026#decision_86747\"><em>Satoriagricultural <\/em><\/a><em><a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/en-tv-novosti-v-t-r-productions-llc-memorandum-and-opinion-of-the-united-states-district-for-the-district-of-columbia-thursday-8th-january-2026#decision_86747\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">Consultancy<\/a><\/em><a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/en-tv-novosti-v-t-r-productions-llc-memorandum-and-opinion-of-the-united-states-district-for-the-district-of-columbia-thursday-8th-january-2026#decision_86747\"><em> v T&amp;R Productions LLC<\/em>, US District Court for the District of Columbia, n\u00ba 25-1287 (BAH)<\/a><\/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>Jeffnie Jean Louis<\/strong>, International Arbitration Intern at<strong> <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/jusconnect.com\/en\/d\/profile\/firm\/jones-day\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">Jones Day<\/a><\/strong><\/strong><\/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-66b36ec0 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-66b36ec0\">\n<div style=\"height:30px\" aria-hidden=\"true\" class=\"wp-block-spacer\"><\/div>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Economic Sanctions and Arbitration, Could the Assignment of Disputed Claims Circumvent the Refusal of Recognition and Enforcement on Grounds of International Public Policy?<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n<div style=\"height:10px\" 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\/en-tv-novosti-v-t-r-productions-llc-memorandum-and-opinion-of-the-united-states-district-for-the-district-of-columbia-thursday-8th-january-2026#decision_86747\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">8 January 2026, in <em>Satoriagricultural Consultancy v T&amp;R Productions LLC<\/em><\/a>, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted recognition and enforcement of two arbitral awards ordering a US company to pay USD 13,984,502 to an entity owned by the Russian Federation and subject to sanctions imposed by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (\u201c<strong>OFAC<\/strong>\u201d). The District Court held that, because the rights arising from the arbitration had been assigned to the applicant for recognition and enforcement prior to the imposition of sanctions, recognition of the awards did not violate US international public policy within the meaning of the <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/treaty\/en-united-nations-convention-on-the-recognition-and-enforcement-of-foreign-arbitral-awards-new-york-convention-1958-tuesday-10th-june-1958?su=%2Fen%2Fsearch%3Flang%3Den%26query%3D%2522new%2Byork%2Bconvention%2522%26document-types%3Dtreaty\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">New York Convention (1958)<\/a>. The judgment thus reaffirmed the requirement that the public policy ground for refusing recognition and enforcement be interpreted strictly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In this case, TV-Novosti, an entity owned by the Russian Federation, terminated on 14 April 2022 the three contracts binding it to the US company T&amp;R Productions LLC (\u201c<strong>T&amp;R<\/strong>\u201d or \u201c<strong>the respondent<\/strong>\u201d), for the production of content intended for RT America. Following that termination and T&amp;R\u2019s failure to reimburse advances paid for services not performed, TV-Novosti initiated in December 2022 three arbitration proceedings before the <a href=\"https:\/\/jusconnect.com\/en\/d\/profile\/institution\/en-icacrfcci-international-commercial-arbitration-court-at-the-chamber-of-commerce-and-industry-of-the-russian-federation\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">International Commercial Arbitration Court at the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of the Russian Federation<\/a> (\u201c<strong>ICAC<\/strong>\u201d).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In February 2024, by the rendering of three arbitral awards, the arbitral tribunal ruled in favour of TV-Novosti and ordered T&amp;R to pay nearly USD 14 million, including the amounts to be reimbursed as well as the costs of arbitration. On 20 August 2024, less than one month before TV-Novosti was officially designated under OFAC sanctions for electoral interference, with all transactions with them prohibited, the company <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/other\/en-tv-novosti-v-t-r-productions-llc-assignment-agreement-no-1-tuesday-20th-august-2024#other_document_45565\">assigned the rights<\/a> arising from the awards to Satoriagricultural Consultancy and Projects Management LLC (\u201c<strong>SCPM<\/strong>\u201d or \u201c<strong>the applicant<\/strong>\u201d), a company established in the United Arab Emirates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In its capacity as assignee, SCPM filed a <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/other\/en-tv-novosti-v-t-r-productions-llc-petition-to-recognize-and-enforce-arbitral-award-friday-25th-april-2025#other_document_45564\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">petition before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia<\/a> seeking recognition and enforcement of the awards pursuant to the New York Convention, as incorporated into U.S. law by the <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/rule\/en-united-states-of-america-federal-arbitration-act-1925-9-u-s-c-as-amended-2022-usa-federal-arbitration-act-1925-as-amended-2022-thursday-3rd-march-2022?su=%2Fen%2Fsearch%3Flang%3Den%26query%3DFederal%2BArbitration%2BAct&amp;contents%5B0%5D=en\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">Federal Arbitration Act<\/a>, 9 USC \u00a7201 <em>et seq<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The petition was properly served on T&amp;R on 12 May 2025. However, the respondent failed to appear or file any responsive pleading within the time prescribed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. At the applicant\u2019s request, the Clerk entered a <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/en-tv-novosti-v-t-r-productions-llc-default-of-the-united-states-district-and-bankruptcy-court-for-the-district-of-columbia-monday-12th-may-2025#decision_81451\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">default<\/a>. SCPM subsequently filed a motion for default judgment and sought recognition and enforcement of the three arbitral awards, an award of costs, and post-judgment interest pursuant to 28 USC \u00a71961.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In light of the particular circumstances of the case, and in particular the assignment of the awards shortly before TV-Novosti\u2019s designation as a sanctioned entity, the Court, by order dated 10 September 2025, invited the applicant to demonstrate that enforcement of the awards would not be contrary to US public policy within the meaning of <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/treaty\/en-united-nations-convention-on-the-recognition-and-enforcement-of-foreign-arbitral-awards-new-york-convention-1958-tuesday-10th-june-1958?su=%2Fen%2Fsearch%3Flang%3Den%26query%3D%2522new%2Byork%2Bconvention%2522%26document-types%3Dtreaty#art_2903\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">Article V(2)(b) of the New York Convention<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Court also requested the position of the United States Government. After obtaining two extensions of time, the Government ultimately indicated that it took no position on the application of the public policy exception in this case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The matter was then taken under advisement on the motion for default judgment. Despite the respondent\u2019s default, the Court had to determine whether the conditions for recognition set out in the New York Convention were satisfied and whether any of the exhaustively enumerated exceptions, including the one based on violation of the public policy of the forum, could bar enforcement of the awards.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">By <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/en-tv-novosti-v-t-r-productions-llc-memorandum-and-opinion-of-the-united-states-district-for-the-district-of-columbia-thursday-8th-january-2026#decision_86747\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">judgment dated 8 January 2026<\/a>, the Court, while noting that the assignment of the awards to SCPM had occurred only a few weeks before TV-Novosti\u2019s designation under US sanctions, granted the applicant\u2019s request and ordered recognition and enforcement of the arbitral awards.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The decision arose in a context marked by the growing entanglement of international tensions and cross-border business relations, a context in which the scope of the international public policy exception tends to expand, while, by a countervailing effect, the pro-enforcement bias of arbitration is correspondingly tested. The case thus raised the question of a possible circumvention of economic sanctions regimes, but also that of the delineation, strict or expansive, of the concept of public policy in recognition and enforcement proceedings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">First, with respect to the interpretation of Article V(2)(b) of the New York Convention, the Court adopted a decidedly restrictive approach to the international public policy exception. It recalled that the exception must be construed narrowly and cannot serve as a vehicle for introducing geopolitical considerations into the mechanism for recognition of awards. By distinguishing public policy, understood as the core of fundamental legal principles, from the political or strategic interests of the State, the Court refused to equate economic sanctions regimes with an automatic violation of international public policy. It required that recognition of the award offend the forum\u2019s most basic notions of justice, a threshold that remains particularly high.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Secondly, as regards the risk of circumvention of sanctions, the Court proceeded in two steps. It observed, first, that the assignment of the awards and the payment of the purchase price had taken place prior to TV-Novosti\u2019s designation as a sanctioned entity, the measures adopted producing essentially prospective effects. On the record before it, no established violation of sanctions law had therefore been demonstrated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Most importantly, the Court drew a structural distinction between judicial recognition of an award and its material enforcement. Recognition does not in itself affect any transfer of funds to a sanctioned entity; it merely confers enforceability on an arbitral decision. If, at a later stage of compulsory enforcement, a transfer of funds were to contravene applicable sanctions, it would then be for the competent authorities, foremost among them OFAC, to neutralise its effects.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It is on this point that the decision gave rise to doctrinal debate. By dissociating the review of recognition from compliance with sanctions, the Court suggested that the existence of a sanctions regime does not, in itself, constitute an obstacle to recognition of an award, provided that administrative blocking mechanisms may intervene at the enforcement stage. One may therefore wonder what outcome would have followed had the petition been filed directly by the sanctioned entity, or had the assignment occurred after the entry into force of the restrictive measures. The reasoning did not expressly resolve that hypothesis, but it implied that the answer would not be automatic. International public policy, as interpreted here, does not merge with the State\u2019s sanctions policy; it remains conceptually distinct.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">By maintaining a narrow reading of the international public policy exception, the Court preserved the pro-enforcement framework of the New York Convention, while deferring effective control of compliance with sanctions to the stage of concrete enforcement.<\/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 March 4, 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:\/\/lnkd.in\/edP9rXxp\" 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>Jeffnie\u00a0Jean Louis<\/strong> holds a Master 2 in International Business Law and completed the DJCE program at the\u00a0Institut\u00a0Droit des Affaires of Aix-Marseille University. She has gained practical experience in international law firms and corporate legal departments, including internships at Airbus and Hughes Hubbard &amp; Reed LLP, and she is currently interning in international arbitration at <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/jusconnect.com\/en\/d\/profile\/firm\/jones-day\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">Jones Day<\/a><\/strong>. She is concurrently preparing for the French Bar Exam (CRFPA), with the ambition of pursuing a career in commercial law and international arbitration.\u00a0<\/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-66b36ec0\">\n<h1 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>La juridiction am\u00e9ricaine pr\u00e9serve l&#8217;ex\u00e9cution des sentences malgr\u00e9 les sanctions dans Satoriagricultural c. T&amp;R Productions<\/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><a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/en-tv-novosti-v-t-r-productions-llc-memorandum-and-opinion-of-the-united-states-district-for-the-district-of-columbia-thursday-8th-january-2026#decision_86747\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\"><em>Satoriagricultural Consultancy <\/em><\/a><em><a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/en-tv-novosti-v-t-r-productions-llc-memorandum-and-opinion-of-the-united-states-district-for-the-district-of-columbia-thursday-8th-january-2026#decision_86747\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">c<\/a><\/em><a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/en-tv-novosti-v-t-r-productions-llc-memorandum-and-opinion-of-the-united-states-district-for-the-district-of-columbia-thursday-8th-january-2026#decision_86747\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\"><em> T&amp;R Productions LLC<\/em>, US District Court for the District of Columbia, n\u00ba 25-1287 (BAH)<\/a><\/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\">Le <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/en-tv-novosti-v-t-r-productions-llc-memorandum-and-opinion-of-the-united-states-district-for-the-district-of-columbia-thursday-8th-january-2026#decision_86747\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">8 janvier 2026, in <em>Satoriagricultural Consultancy c T&amp;R Productions LLC<\/em><\/a><em>, laU.S. District Court for the District of Columbia<\/em> a accord\u00e9 l\u2019exequatur de deux sentences arbitrales condamnant une entreprise am\u00e9ricaine \u00e0 verser 13 984 502 dollars am\u00e9ricains \u00e0 une entreprise d\u00e9tenue par la F\u00e9d\u00e9ration de Russie, vis\u00e9e par des sanctions de l\u2019<em>Office of Foreign Assets Control<\/em> (\u00ab <strong>OFAC<\/strong> \u00bb). La <em>District Court<\/em> a consid\u00e9r\u00e9 que les droits issus de l\u2019arbitrage ayant \u00e9t\u00e9 c\u00e9d\u00e9s au demandeur \u00e0 l\u2019exequatur avant l\u2019imposition des sanctions, la reconnaissance des sentences ne contrevenait pas \u00e0 l\u2019ordre public international am\u00e9ricain au sens de la Convention de New York. La d\u00e9cision r\u00e9affirme ainsi l\u2019exigence d\u2019une interpr\u00e9tation stricte du motif de refus d\u2019exequatur tir\u00e9 de la violation de l\u2019ordre public international.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">En l\u2019esp\u00e8ce, TV-Novosti, entit\u00e9 d\u00e9tenue par la F\u00e9d\u00e9ration de Russie, r\u00e9silie, le 14 avril 2022, les trois contrats la liant \u00e0 l\u2019entreprise am\u00e9ricaine T&amp;R Productions LLC (\u00ab <strong>T&amp;R <\/strong>\u00bb ou la \u00ab <strong>d\u00e9fenderesse<\/strong> \u00bb) pour la production de contenus destin\u00e9s \u00e0 RT America. \u00c0 la suite de cette r\u00e9siliation et du d\u00e9faut de remboursement par T&amp;R des avances vers\u00e9es au titre de prestations non ex\u00e9cut\u00e9es, TV-Novosti initie, en d\u00e9cembre 2022, trois proc\u00e9dures d\u2019arbitrage devant <a href=\"https:\/\/jusconnect.com\/en\/d\/profile\/institution\/en-icacrfcci-international-commercial-arbitration-court-at-the-chamber-of-commerce-and-industry-of-the-russian-federation\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">l\u2019<em>International Commercial Arbitration Court<\/em> de la Chambre de commerce et d\u2019industrie de la F\u00e9d\u00e9ration de Russie<\/a> (\u00ab <strong>ICAC <\/strong>\u00bb).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">En f\u00e9vrier 2024, par trois sentences arbitrales, le tribunal arbitral statue en faveur de TV-Novosti et condamne T&amp;R \u00e0 lui verser pr\u00e8s de 14 millions de dollars, comprenant les sommes \u00e0 rembourser ainsi que les frais d\u2019arbitrage. Le 20 ao\u00fbt 2024, soit moins d\u2019un mois avant que TV-Novosti ne fasse officiellement l\u2019objet de sanctions de l\u2019OFAC pour ing\u00e9rence \u00e9lectorale, moment \u00e0 partir duquel les transactions avec elle \u00e9taient interdites, l\u2019entreprise <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/other\/en-tv-novosti-v-t-r-productions-llc-assignment-agreement-no-1-tuesday-20th-august-2024#other_document_45565\">c\u00e8de les droits issus des sentences<\/a> \u00e0 Satoriagricultural Consultancy and Projects Management LLC (\u00ab <strong>SCPM <\/strong>\u00bb ou \u00ab <strong>la requ\u00e9rante <\/strong>\u00bb), soci\u00e9t\u00e9 \u00e9tablie aux \u00c9mirats arabes unis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">En qualit\u00e9 de cessionnaire, SCPM saisit la <em>U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia<\/em> d\u2019une <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/other\/en-tv-novosti-v-t-r-productions-llc-petition-to-recognize-and-enforce-arbitral-award-friday-25th-april-2025#other_document_45564\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">requ\u00eate en reconnaissance et ex\u00e9cution des sentences<\/a> sur le fondement de la Convention de New York, telle qu\u2019incorpor\u00e9e en droit am\u00e9ricain par le <em><a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/rule\/en-united-states-of-america-federal-arbitration-act-1925-9-u-s-c-as-amended-2022-usa-federal-arbitration-act-1925-as-amended-2022-thursday-3rd-march-2022?su=%2Fen%2Fsearch%3Flang%3Den%26query%3DFederal%2BArbitration%2BAct&amp;contents%5B0%5D=en\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">Federal Arbitration Act<\/a><\/em> (9 U.S.C. \u00a7 201 et s.).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">La requ\u00eate est r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement signifi\u00e9e \u00e0 T&amp;R le 12 mai 2025. Toutefois, la d\u00e9fenderesse ne compara\u00eet pas et ne d\u00e9pose aucun m\u00e9moire en d\u00e9fense dans le d\u00e9lai imparti par les r\u00e8gles f\u00e9d\u00e9rales de proc\u00e9dure civile. \u00c0 la demande de la requ\u00e9rante, le greffe proc\u00e8de alors \u00e0 l\u2019enregistrement d\u2019un <em><a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/en-tv-novosti-v-t-r-productions-llc-default-of-the-united-states-district-and-bankruptcy-court-for-the-district-of-columbia-monday-12th-may-2025#decision_81451\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">entry of default<\/a><\/em>. SCPM forme ensuite une <em>motion for default judgment <\/em>(jugement par d\u00e9faut) et sollicite :\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>la reconnaissance et l\u2019ex\u00e9cution des trois sentences arbitrales ;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>\u00a0l\u2019allocation des frais ;<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>l\u2019octroi d\u2019int\u00e9r\u00eats post\u00e9rieurs au jugement en application de 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1961.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Eu \u00e9gard aux circonstances particuli\u00e8res de l\u2019esp\u00e8ce, et notamment \u00e0 la cession des sentences intervenue peu avant l\u2019inscription de TV-Novosti sur la liste des entit\u00e9s sanctionn\u00e9es, la juridiction invite la requ\u00e9rante, par ordonnance du 10 septembre 2025, \u00e0 d\u00e9montrer que l\u2019ex\u00e9cution des sentences ne serait pas contraire \u00e0 l\u2019ordre public des \u00c9tats-Unis au sens de <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/treaty\/en-united-nations-convention-on-the-recognition-and-enforcement-of-foreign-arbitral-awards-new-york-convention-1958-tuesday-10th-june-1958?su=%2Fen%2Fsearch%3Flang%3Den%26query%3D%2522new%2Byork%2Bconvention%2522%26document-types%3Dtreaty#art_2903\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">l\u2019article V(2)(b) de la Convention de New York<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">La Cour sollicite \u00e9galement la position du gouvernement des \u00c9tats-Unis. Apr\u00e8s deux prorogations de d\u00e9lai, celui-ci indique finalement qu\u2019il ne prend pas position sur l\u2019application de l\u2019exception d\u2019ordre public en l\u2019esp\u00e8ce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">L\u2019affaire est d\u00e8s lors mise en d\u00e9lib\u00e9r\u00e9 sur la demande de jugement par d\u00e9faut. Il appartenait \u00e0 la juridiction d\u2019examiner, malgr\u00e9 la d\u00e9faillance du d\u00e9fendeur, si les conditions de reconnaissance pr\u00e9vues par la Convention de New York \u00e9taient r\u00e9unies et si l\u2019une des exceptions limitativement \u00e9num\u00e9r\u00e9es, notamment celle tir\u00e9e de la violation de l\u2019ordre public du for, \u00e9tait susceptible de faire obstacle \u00e0 l\u2019ex\u00e9cution des sentences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Par <a href=\"https:\/\/jusmundi.com\/en\/document\/decision\/en-tv-novosti-v-t-r-productions-llc-memorandum-and-opinion-of-the-united-states-district-for-the-district-of-columbia-thursday-8th-january-2026#decision_86747\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">jugement du 8 janvier 2026<\/a>, la Cour, m\u00eame en ayant relev\u00e9 que la cession des sentences \u00e0 SCPM est intervenue quelques semaines seulement avant l\u2019inscription de TV-Novosti sur la liste des sanctions am\u00e9ricaines, fait droit \u00e0 la demande de la requ\u00e9rante et ordonne la reconnaissance et l\u2019ex\u00e9cution des sentences arbitrales.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">La d\u00e9cision intervient dans un contexte marqu\u00e9 par l\u2019imbrication croissante des tensions internationales et des relations d\u2019affaires internationales, contexte dans lequel la port\u00e9e de l\u2019exception d\u2019ordre public international tend \u00e0 s\u2019\u00e9paissir, tandis que, par un effet de balancier, le principe de faveur \u00e0 l\u2019arbitrage se trouve corr\u00e9lativement mis \u00e0 l\u2019\u00e9preuve. L\u2019affaire soul\u00e8ve ainsi la question d\u2019un \u00e9ventuel contournement des r\u00e9gimes de sanctions \u00e9conomiques, mais aussi celle de la d\u00e9limitation, stricte ou extensive, de la notion d\u2019ordre public dans le cadre du contr\u00f4le de l\u2019exequatur.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">D\u2019abord, s\u2019agissant de l\u2019interpr\u00e9tation de l\u2019article V(2)(b) de la Convention de New York, la Cour adopte une approche r\u00e9solument restrictive de l\u2019exception d\u2019ordre public international. Elle rappelle que celle-ci doit \u00eatre interpr\u00e9t\u00e9e \u00e9troitement et ne saurait servir de vecteur \u00e0 l\u2019introduction des consid\u00e9rations g\u00e9opolitiques dans le m\u00e9canisme de reconnaissance des sentences. En distinguant l\u2019ordre public, entendu comme noyau de principes juridiques fondamentaux, des int\u00e9r\u00eats politiques ou strat\u00e9giques de l\u2019\u00c9tat, la juridiction refuse d\u2019assimiler les r\u00e9gimes de sanctions \u00e9conomiques \u00e0 une contrari\u00e9t\u00e9 automatique \u00e0 l\u2019ordre public international. Elle exige que la reconnaissance de la sentence heurte les conceptions fondamentales de justice de l\u2019ordre juridique du for, seuil dont l\u2019exigence demeure particuli\u00e8rement \u00e9lev\u00e9e.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Ensuite, quant au risque de contournement des sanctions, la Cour raisonne en deux temps.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Elle rel\u00e8ve, d\u2019une part, que la cession des sentences et le paiement du prix sont intervenus ant\u00e9rieurement \u00e0 l\u2019inscription de TV-Novosti sur la liste des entit\u00e9s sanctionn\u00e9es, les mesures adopt\u00e9es produisant des effets essentiellement prospectifs. En l\u2019\u00e9tat du dossier, aucune violation caract\u00e9ris\u00e9e du droit des sanctions n\u2019\u00e9tait donc \u00e9tablie.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">D\u2019autre part, et surtout, la juridiction op\u00e8re une distinction structurante entre la reconnaissance judiciaire d\u2019une sentence et son ex\u00e9cution mat\u00e9rielle. L\u2019exequatur ne proc\u00e8de \u00e0 aucun transfert de fonds au profit d\u2019une entit\u00e9 sanctionn\u00e9e ; il se borne \u00e0 conf\u00e9rer force ex\u00e9cutoire \u00e0 une d\u00e9cision arbitrale. Si, au stade ult\u00e9rieur de l\u2019ex\u00e9cution forc\u00e9e, un transfert de fonds devait contrevenir aux sanctions en vigueur, il appartiendrait alors aux autorit\u00e9s comp\u00e9tentes, au premier rang desquelles l\u2019OFAC, d\u2019en neutraliser les effets.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">C\u2019est sur ce point que la d\u00e9cision suscite une interrogation doctrinale. En dissociant le contr\u00f4le de l\u2019exequatur du respect des sanctions, la Cour sugg\u00e8re que l\u2019existence d\u2019un r\u00e9gime de sanctions ne constitue pas, en elle-m\u00eame, un obstacle \u00e0 la reconnaissance d\u2019une sentence, d\u00e8s lors que des m\u00e9canismes administratifs peuvent intervenir au stade de l\u2019ex\u00e9cution. On peut d\u00e8s lors s\u2019interroger sur l\u2019issue qu\u2019aurait connue la demande si elle avait \u00e9t\u00e9 form\u00e9e directement par l\u2019entit\u00e9 sanctionn\u00e9e, ou si la cession \u00e9tait intervenue post\u00e9rieurement \u00e0 l\u2019entr\u00e9e en vigueur des mesures restrictives. La motivation ne tranche pas express\u00e9ment cette hypoth\u00e8se, mais elle laisse entendre que la solution ne serait pas automatique. L\u2019ordre public international, tel qu\u2019interpr\u00e9t\u00e9 ici, ne se confond pas avec la politique de sanctions de l\u2019\u00c9tat ; il en demeure conceptuellement distinct.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">En maintenant une lecture \u00e9troite de l\u2019exception d\u2019ordre public international, la Cour pr\u00e9serve l\u2019\u00e9conomie pro-ex\u00e9cution de la Convention de New York, tout en reportant le contr\u00f4le effectif du respect des sanctions au stade de l\u2019ex\u00e9cution concr\u00e8te.<\/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 mercredi 4 mars, 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:\/\/lnkd.in\/eyiT7wbK\" 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>Jeffnie\u00a0Jean Louis<\/strong> holds a Master 2 in International Business Law and completed the DJCE program at the\u00a0Institut\u00a0Droit des Affaires of Aix-Marseille University. She has gained practical experience in international law firms and corporate legal departments, including internships at Airbus and Hughes Hubbard &amp; Reed LLP, and she is currently interning in international arbitration at <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/jusconnect.com\/en\/d\/profile\/firm\/jones-day\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" title=\"\">Jones Day<\/a><\/strong>. She is concurrently preparing for the French Bar Exam (&#8220;<strong>CRFPA<\/strong>&#8220;), with the ambition of pursuing a career in commercial law and international arbitration.\u00a0<\/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>A US ruling clarifies that sanctions alone do not trigger the New York Convention public policy bar to recognition of arbitral awards.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":289415,"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":"163","hide":""},"jnews_social_meta":{"fb_title":"US District Court Narrows Public Policy Exception in Sanctions Context in Satoriagricultural v T&R Productions","fb_description":"A US ruling clarifies that sanctions alone do not trigger the New York Convention public policy bar to recognition of arbitral awards.","fb_image":"289416","twitter_title":"US District Court Narrows Public Policy Exception in Sanctions Context in Satoriagricultural v T&R Productions","twitter_description":"A US ruling clarifies that sanctions alone do not trigger the New York Convention public policy bar to recognition of arbitral awards.","twitter_image":"289416"},"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":[162,205,207,188,276,163,161,247],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-289414","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-americas","category-arbitration","category-commercial-arbitration","category-legal-insights","category-paris-baby-arbitration-pba","category-u-s-a","category-world","category-worldwide-perspectives"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/289414","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=289414"}],"version-history":[{"count":10,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/289414\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":289431,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/289414\/revisions\/289431"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/289415"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=289414"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=289414"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=289414"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=289414"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}