金诺快讯 | 金诺跨国携手助力天津客户,纽约法院承认中国公司仲裁胜诉裁决！

金诺律师事务所徐燕朝律师、李金晓律师和袁昊宸律师组成的涉外债权债务法律服务团队在一宗跨国贸易纠纷案中，继代表客户成功取得CIETAC仲裁胜诉裁决后，又携手美国战略合作伙伴White & Williams llp.,成功取得美国纽约州地方法院对该仲裁裁决的承认。如无意外，裁决结果将在美国进入执行程序。在中美贸易战风云变幻的大背景下，如何在法律框架下维持正常的贸易往来是两国共同关心的问题。正因为如此，该案引起了美国权威法律杂志《LAW360》的关注并于5月30日进行了及时的报道。

同时，另外一宗针对美国公司的仲裁裁决执行案正在加利福尼亚州法院审理中。金诺，正以自己的专业技能服务于客户，维护客户在世界各地的合法权益。特此感谢金诺何云霞律师、谈柏轩律师和范凡律师，你们使这一切成为可能。

 下附《LAW360》报道全文：

Chinese Co. Gets Award OK In Dietary Products Sales Row

By Joyce Hanson

Law360 (May 30, 2018, 8:50 PM EDT) -- A New York federal court on Wednesday confirmed a $575,905 award for a Chinese company against a Long Island nutritional products maker that an arbitrator issued after finding the manufacturer failed to pay for an order of dietary supplements, ruling it has no viable defenses against enforcement of the award.

U.S. District Judge Joanna Seybert’s order denied Tiancheng Chempharm Inc. USA’s Jan. 4 motion seeking to dismiss Tianjin Port Free Trade Zone International Trade Service Co. Ltd.’s case as frivolous and to dismiss the arbitral award issued by the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission in December 2015. The judge said the Chinese company submitted an authentic copy of the award and the agreement to arbitrate, and she slapped down the Long Island manufacturer’s claims that it was never properly served, that the sales contract was a forgery and that Tianjin did not try to amicably settle the dispute before commencing arbitration.

“The court is satisfied that the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission provided Tiancheng with the opportunity to participate in the arbitration in a meaningful manner. As the award sets forth, notice of the arbitration and all documents were provided to Tiancheng at the address listed in the sales contract,” Judge Seybert wrote in a memorandum.

The judge said that when some of the documents were later returned to CIETAC, Tianjin provided another address listed with the New York Secretary of State for Tiancheng and that the documents were once again sent to Tiancheng at that address.

“Those documents were not returned, and CIETAC verified that the documents were duly served on Tiancheng,” Judge Seybert wrote. “Tiancheng simply chose not to participate in the arbitration proceedings.”

On July 12 Tianjin filed a petition seeking confirmation of the award of $575,905 against Tiancheng. An arbitrator in Beijing had handed down the award in December 2015, pegging most of the dollar amount to the cost of the dietary supplements Tianjin had sold to Tiancheng and for which it was never paid, in violation of a sales contract, according to the decision.

“From aforesaid facts recognized by the arbitral tribunal, the applicant performed the obligation of goods delivery under the contract and the respondent should pay the price of goods as agreed,” the arbitrator, Tao Jie, said in his decision.

According to Tianjin’s petition, the parties entered into a sales contract for Tianjin to sell Tiancheng dietary supplements for $480,000 in December 2013. The products included 5,000 kg of creatine monohydrate, 4,000 kg of betaine anhydrous and 9,000 kg of creatine HCL.

Tiancheng describes itself on its website as a manufacturer specializing in pharmaceutical raw materials, sports nutritional ingredients, joint health ingredients and food additives, among other products.

Tianjin said that although it timely delivered the products and Tiancheng never objected to their quality, the manufacturer failed to pay.

As part of their sales contract, the parties agreed to arbitrate disputes before the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission. Tianjin began arbitration proceedings before the commission in March 2015, the company said in its petition.

Jie said in his decision that Tiancheng had been informed about the proceedings in Beijing but did not show up for a trial in October of that year. Jie, who had been appointed by the arbitration commission’s chairman to oversee the dispute, also said Tiancheng submitted no written objection to Tianjin’s materials, nor did it submit any of its own.

Jie’s decision cited a Chinese law that requires a party to bear liabilities if it fails to hold up its end of a contract.

In addition to ordering Tiancheng to pay $480,000, Jie tacked on interest and fees to reach a total of $575,905.

Counsel for Tianjin and Tiancheng did not respond to requests for comment on Wednesday.

Tianjin is represented by Eric B. Porter of White and Williams LLP.

Tiancheng is represented by Hui Chen of the Law Offices of Hui Chen PC.

The case is Tianjin Port Free Trade Zone International Trade Service Co. Ltd. v. Tiancheng Chempharm Inc. USA, case number 2:17-cv-04130, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

--Additional reporting by Natalie Olivo. Editing by Peter Rozovsky.