International Arbitration 2024 Comparisons

Prevalence of International Arbitration

International arbitration in Greece has been steadily gaining popularity over traditional methods of resolving commercial disputes. Intricate, high-stakes or cross-border disputes are now more likely to be resolved through international arbitration. Other alternative dispute resolution methods like extrajudicial conciliation and mediation are also steadily increasing, albeit to a lesser extent.

Reasons Parties Opt for International Arbitration

Parties choose to include international arbitration clauses in complex and extensively negotiated contracts. This is particularly the case for foreign entities, which are more reluctant to resolve disputes with domestic entities before national courts, preferring the neutral forum of international arbitration instead.

Another reason parties choose arbitration over litigation is the tailored procedural framework of international arbitration, which offers flexibility in procedural matters like tribunal member selection and setting the timetable for arbitral proceedings.

Lastly, the enforceability of the arbitral awards is also of pivotal importance, given that international treaties and national laws establish relatively straightforward and largely uniform procedures for enforcing international arbitral awards.

Basis of Recourse to International Arbitration in Greece

In Greece, international arbitration is most frequently utilised as a dispute resolution method chosen by parties in agreements governed by Greek law. Although Greece is chosen as a seat for arbitration by domestic entities, it is not a preferred choice for foreign entities; venues such as Switzerland, France or the United Kingdom are frequently preferred as arbitration seats in agreements between domestic and foreign entities.

International arbitration clauses are commonly included in agreements within sectors such as construction, renewable energy and international trade. These industries typically involve complex and intricate agreements with significant financial stakes, such as share purchase agreements. Moreover, arbitration agreements are incorporated in contracts with the state awarded under public procurement procedures, such as defence contracts or concession agreements.

International arbitration has increased significantly in such industries in the past years due to the fact that parties seek a neutral forum to avoid potential biases of domestic courts whilst also avoiding lengthy judicial procedures. Furthermore, the confidentiality of the proceedings is highly valued, particularly when business secrets are at stake.

Institutional arbitration is often favoured because it spares the parties the burden of creating their own rules and procedures. Instead, the parties can rely on the established rules of an arbitral institution, which also provides administrative support throughout the arbitration process.

To this aim, parties tend to opt for arbitral institutions of renowned status, such as the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA), the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC) and the Athens Mediation & Arbitration Organization (EODID).

It is also notable that Greek Law 5016/2023 on international arbitration has recently modernised the regulation of domestic arbitration institutions in Greece. It introduces specific standards for their establishment (minimum capital, etc), ensuring a minimum quality level for the services they provide. However, as far as is known, no new arbitral institutions have been established in Greece in 2024.

There are no specific courts in Greece that are designated to hear solely matters related to international or domestic arbitration.

Law 5016/2023 on International Commercial Arbitration designates the single-member court of first instance as the competent authority for the appointment and replacement of arbitrators, hearing challenges regarding arbitrators and assisting with the taking of evidence.

The three-member court of appeals is the competent court for procedures relating to the setting aside of the arbitral award.

The single-member civil court of first instance is the competent authority for various matters of domestic arbitration, including – among others – the appointment of arbitrators, and also for hearing a party’s appeal against the part of the arbitral award pertaining to the arbitrator fees.

International commercial arbitration in Greece is governed by the newly established Law 5016/2023, which replaced Law 2735/1999. In essence, Law 5016/2023, as explicitly stipulated in Article 2, was meant to integrate the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration of 2006 and its amendments, as well as the latest trends in international arbitration theory and practice.

Deviations From the UNCITRAL Model Law

Even though Law 5016/2023 integrated the amendments introduced in the UNCITRAL Model Law of 2006 (the “Model Law”), it also contains the following deviations.

• Article 16 (multiparty arbitrations): the appointment of the arbitral tribunal in cases of more than one claimant and/or respondent is explicitly regulated. The Model Law contains no provision regulating multiparty arbitration proceedings.
• Article 19.2 (challenge procedure): the arbitrator under challenge shall not participate during the issuance of the decision accepting or declining such challenge, although they can express their views in this regard. The Model Law does not provide for the exclusion of the arbitrator under challenge from the relevant proceedings.
• Article 22 (arbitrators’ liability): in exercising their duties, an arbitrator shall be liable only for intentional misconduct or gross negligence. No provision regulating the arbitrator’s liability is included in the Model Law.
• Article 24 (joinder and consolidation): the arbitral tribunal not only has the power to accept a third party joining the arbitral proceedings (if bound by the arbitration agreement) but can also consolidate two disputes (under specific circumstances). The Model Law is silent on multiparty arbitration proceedings.
• Article 43.2 (action to set aside): new grounds for setting aside an award are introduced, which are the grounds justifying a petition for revision under Articles 544.6 (perjury and falsified/forged documents) and 544.10 (bribery) of the Greek Code of Civil Procedure. The Model Law does not provide for said grounds.
• Article 44.2 (res judicata and enforcement): an arbitral award may have effects on third parties only if such parties are bound by the arbitration agreement. The Model Law has no similar provision.

As explained in 2.1 Governing Law, Law 5016/2023 has replaced Law 2735/1999, and was subsequently amended by Law 5026/2023 concerning Article 7. As far as is known, there is no pending draft legislation introducing changes to the framework for international and/or domestic arbitration in Greece.

According to Article 10.1 et seq of Law 5016/2023, arbitration agreements may be in the form of an arbitration clause in a specific contract or in the form of a separate agreement, and shall be memorialised in a document the content of which has been agreed by the parties expressly or tacitly. Therefore, the arbitration agreement must be in writing; however, this requirement is not constitutive but is only for evidentiary purposes. As per Article 10.4, the parties’ unreserved participation in the arbitral proceedings evidences the conclusion of an arbitration agreement.

The parties' legal capacity to enter into the arbitration agreement shall also be examined, as shall their representative authority, where applicable.

Article 3.4 of Law 5016/2023 provides that any dispute is arbitrable, unless the law prohibits it. Under Greek law, penal disputes, family disputes, insolvency proceedings and enforcement proceedings are deemed non-arbitrable.

Law 5016/2023 (Article 11) has adopted the principle of favorem validitatis of the arbitration clause, according to which an arbitration agreement shall be regarded as valid if it is valid in accordance with the law chosen by the parties, or the law of the seat of arbitration, or the law governing the substantive agreement.

This approach ensures that the arbitration agreement will be upheld if it meets the criteria of any one of these legal frameworks, thus reflecting a pro-arbitration stance, which is also evident in the Greek courts’ jurisprudence.

Law 5016/2023 adopts the fundamental principle of the separability of the arbitration clause, in Article 23.1. In essence, the Law provides that an arbitration clause included in a contract shall be considered an agreement independent of the other terms of the contract. The invalidity or termination of the contract does not automatically render the arbitration clause null.

Law 5016/2023 does not place significant limits on the parties’ autonomy to appoint an arbitrator. In this context, Article 15.1 stipulates that the nationality of a person shall not be an impediment to their appointment as an arbitrator, unless otherwise agreed by the parties. Furthermore, the arbitrator shall be impartial and independent and, as per Article 18.1, a person proposed to be appointed as arbitrator shall declare any fact or circumstance that may give rise to reasonable doubts as to their impartiality or independence.

If the parties’ chosen method for selecting arbitrators fails, Article 15.4 of Law 5016/2023 provides for the following.

• In the case of a three-member tribunal, each party may appoint one arbitrator, and the two appointed arbitrators shall select the president of the tribunal. If a party fails to appoint an arbitrator or the selected arbitrators fail to appoint the president, then the civil single-member court of first instance shall proceed with the appointment following a request of any of the parties.
• In the case of a one-member tribunal, the arbitrator shall be appointed upon request of a party to the competent civil court.

In the case of a multiparty arbitration, the claimants or the respondents shall jointly appoint one arbitrator as per Article 16 of Law 5016/2023. Should they fail to do so, the relevant appointment shall be made by the civil single-member court of first instance.

Lastly, if for any reason an arbitral tribunal has not been appointed within 90 days of the submission of the request for arbitration, the civil single-member court of first instance may appoint all the members of the tribunal following a party’s relevant request.

The civil single-member court of first instance located in the region of the seat of the arbitration or in the district where the applicant is domiciled or, absent a domicile, the single-member Athens court of first instance is competent for the appointment, removal or replacement of arbitrators.

When appointing an arbitrator, the civil single-member court of first instance must consider the qualifications specified in the parties' agreement, ensure the arbitrators’ independence and impartiality, and, in some instances, take into account the nationality of the parties involved. Lastly, all decisions issued by said court in the context of these proceedings are not subject to means of recourse.

Article 18.2 of Law 5016/2023 puts forward the grounds to request a challenge of an arbitrator. A petition for the challenge of an arbitrator is valid whenever there is a circumstance giving rise to reasonable doubts as to the impartiality or independence of the arbitrator, or if the arbitrator does not possess the qualities agreed by the parties. An arbitrator may be challenged even by the party that appointed them if the grounds for challenge become known to said party after the appointment. Furthermore, Article 19 of the same law stipulates the procedure to be followed in case of a petition for challenge if the parties had not agreed in this regard.

With respect to the removal/replacement of arbitrators, Article 20.1 of Law 5016/2023 provides that an arbitrator's mandate is terminated if said arbitrator becomes de iure or de facto unable to perform their functions or for other reasons fails to act within a reasonable time.

Any arbitrator removed from their duties as per the provisions of Article 19 or Article 20 is replaced in accordance with the procedure set out in Article 21 of Law 5016/2023.

Article 18 on the grounds of challenge of an arbitrator refers to “justifiable doubts of an arbitrator’s independence and impartiality”. The same holds for the rules of the principal arbitral institutions. Apart from the relevant case law, the updated IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration of the International Bar Association of 2024 provide useful guidance by listing specific circumstances (designated under “Red”, “Orange” and “Green” Lists), with the aim of illustrating the General Standards, assisting arbitrators in making their disclosures and aiding parties in assessing whether disclosed information may be such as to create doubts with respect to the arbitrator’s independence and impartiality.

Greek case law and theory exclude certain matters from arbitration, such as penal disputes, marital disputes, disputes between parents and children, and issues related to insolvency or enforcement proceedings.

Article 23.1.a of Law 5016/2023 explicitly provides for the competence-competence principle by stipulating that the arbitral tribunal shall rule on its jurisdiction and the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement.

In general, Greek courts respect the jurisdictional rulings of arbitral tribunals while also intervening when necessary to correct jurisdictional overreach. The circumstances under which a state court can address issues of the arbitral tribunal's jurisdiction are as follows.

• Action before the civil courts: Article 12.1 of Law 5016/2023 provides that if an action is brought before a civil court in a dispute that is the subject of an arbitration agreement, then the court shall refer the dispute to arbitration following a party’s relevant request, unless it holds that the arbitration agreement is invalid, ineffective or unenforceable.
• Set aside proceedings: Article 43.2.a.aa of Law 5016/2023 stipulates that an arbitral award may be set aside by the civil three-member court of appeals if such court holds that the arbitration agreement was invalid, that a party lacked capacity to execute such agreement or that the arbitral tribunal declined its jurisdiction notwithstanding a valid arbitration agreement.
• Enforcement proceedings: as per Article 43.7 of Law 5016/2023, even if a party has waived its right to set aside the arbitral award, it maintains the right to raise objections that constitute setting-aside grounds in the context of enforcement proceedings, including grounds relating to lack of jurisdiction.
• Petition for annulment of an administrative act before an administrative court: as per settled case law (based on judgment 24/1993 of the Supreme Special Court), whenever an administrative court is called to annul an administrative act on the basis of a relevant arbitral award, it shall also examine whether or not the arbitral tribunal issuing this award has exceeded its jurisdictional boundaries. In this respect, it should be noted that, in a series of judgments, the 2nd Chamber of the Hellenic Council of State held that such excess of jurisdictional boundaries may be established whenever an arbitral tribunal adjudicates an investment dispute that raises issues of interpretation and/or application of provisions of EU law.

Article 23.2 of Law 5016/2023 stipulates that an objection to the lack of jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal shall be raised no later than the lapse of the deadline for the submission of the statement of defence, unless this belated submission is deemed justified by the arbitral tribunal.

A distinction should be made with respect to the time limit within which the parties have the right to go to court to challenge the jurisdiction of the tribunal.

• If the arbitral tribunal ruled on its jurisdiction by a preliminary decision, the arbitral tribunal’s preliminary decision upholding its jurisdiction may be challenged only as part of the award on the merits, unless the parties have agreed otherwise or the tribunal has consented to an action to set aside this preliminary decision. In this case, the challenge against the preliminary decision should be filed within 30 days of the tribunal’s consent being given or the service of the award (whichever is later), in accordance with Article 23.4 of Law 5016/2023.

• If the arbitral tribunal ruled on its jurisdiction by its final award, an action to set aside shall be filed within three months from the service of the award to the party challenging said award, as per Article 43.3 of Law 5016/2023. If a request for the correction or interpretation of the award is pending, said deadline begins from the service of the relevant decision.

The standard of judicial review for questions of jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal is not specified by Law 5016/2023. The court where an application to set aside is pending is not bound by the arbitral tribunal’s decision regarding its own jurisdiction and has the right to conduct a full review of the arbitration agreement to determine the existence and validity thereof.

As per Article 12.1 of Law 5016/2023, a court before which an action is brought in a matter that is the subject of an arbitration agreement shall refer the parties to arbitration if a party so requests not later than the first hearing, unless the court finds that the arbitration agreement is null and void, ineffective or incapable of being performed.

In this respect, Article 12.2 provides that arbitral proceedings may be commenced or continued, even if such an action is pending before the courts.

Overall, the approach of Greek courts towards parties who commence court proceedings in breach of an arbitration agreement is to uphold the arbitration agreement and refer the dispute to arbitration.

The principle of the natural judge, as reflected in Article 8 of the Greek Constitution, stipulates that no one shall be deprived, without their consent, of the judge assigned to them by law. Consequently, only the parties executing an arbitration agreement are bound by it and are thus subject to the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal. However, there are limited circumstances where an arbitral tribunal may assume jurisdiction over individuals or entities that are not signatories to the arbitration agreement. For instance, such exceptional circumstance may be universal succession (eg, inheritance).

Furthermore, Article 24.1 of Law 5016/2023 stipulates that the arbitral tribunal has the power to accept that a party joins the arbitral proceedings at a later stage under the condition that this party is bound by the arbitration agreement. In fact, as per the explanatory memorandum, both permissive intervention (prostheti paremvasi) and intervention of a right (kyria paremvasi) are allowed under this new framework.

As per Article 25 of Law 5016/2023, unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the arbitral tribunal may, upon request of a party, order any interim measure it deems necessary regarding the subject matter of the dispute. The tribunal may also require the party against whom the measure is ordered to provide a form of security. In circumstances of extreme urgency, the tribunal may even issue a preliminary order to regulate the situation pending its decision on the interim measures.

The relevant decision may be rendered in the form of an award or in a different form, such as a procedural order.

Even if the arbitral tribunal has wide discretion regarding the selected interim relief, the following limitations apply:

• the tribunal must not order more interim measures than necessary;
• the tribunal should choose the least burdensome measure of the available options;
• the tribunal shall not impose interim relief that is contrary to international public policy; and
• the tribunal shall refrain from ordering interim relief to the extent that a civil court has already been involved in interim relief proceedings.

If the party to whom the application for provisional measures is directed does not comply with the arbitral award, intervention by a competent Greek court (either a single-member court of first instance or the civil district court of the locus executionis) is necessary, as stipulated by Article 25.5 of Law 5016/2023 and Articles 683.1 and 4 of the Greek Code of Civil Procedure.

The arbitral tribunal may, on its own initiative or upon request of a party, revoke, suspend or modify the interim measures and the security imposed by it. Any interim relief is binding upon the party against which it is imposed but is of a temporary nature only, and shall not influence the outcome of the main proceedings.

Interim Relief by National Courts in Arbitral Proceedings

The role of the national courts in the context of granting preliminary/interim relief in arbitral proceedings is crucial. At the outset, Article 13 of Law 5016/2023 stipulates that the arbitration agreement does not prevent the parties from requesting any competent court to order interim measures regarding the subject matter of the agreement, before or even after the commencement of the arbitration.

Furthermore, Article 25.5 of Law 5016/2023 provides that the competent civil court will recognise and declare the interim relief and the security imposed by the arbitral tribunal as enforceable unless such measures are contrary to international public policy or unless interim relief proceedings for this case have already been initiated before it.

Under Article 36 in conjunction with Article 3.1 of Law 5016/2023, the civil courts may order obligatory measures to assist with the taking of evidence in foreign-seated arbitrations.

The “Emergency Arbitrator”

Greek law does not restrict the use of emergency arbitrators. In fact, Article 25.1 of Greek Law 5016/2023 suggests that the arbitral tribunal’s authority to order interim or preliminary measures is a provision that the parties can opt to override. Therefore, parties may agree to opt for “emergency arbitrator” proceedings for urgent interim measures that cannot wait for the constitution of an arbitral tribunal.

Regardless of the appointment of an emergency arbitrator, it should also be underscored that, according to Article 13 of Greek Law 5016/2023, Greek national courts can order interim or preliminary measures regarding the subject matter of the dispute, either before or after the initiation of arbitral proceedings.

Under Greek law 5016/2023, arbitral tribunals are allowed to order security for costs.

In principle, the parties are free to agree on the procedure to be followed by the arbitral tribunal in conducting the proceedings. As the parties have the freedom to set their own procedural rules, they can also delegate this responsibility to an arbitral institution, as per Article 5.3 of Law 5016/2023, or choose to follow the rules of a specific institution, such as the ICC or the LCIA.

In the absence of any such agreement, the arbitral tribunal will define the procedure as per Article 27.2 of Law 5016/2023.

The parties’ autonomy to decide on the procedure of the arbitration is subject to the rules of mandatory law of Law 5016/2023, which include the equal treatment principle under Article 26 and the right to be heard under Article 32.

Greek law does not provide for any specific procedural steps to be followed in terms of international arbitral proceedings. Such steps are determined by the parties or a third party or the arbitrators in accordance with the analysis set out in 7.1 Governing Rules. However, Law 5016/2023 includes certain default provisions in case no agreement has been concluded between the parties. Such default procedural steps pertain to the commencement date of the arbitral proceedings (Article 29), the deadlines for the submission of the respondent’s answer to the claimant’s request for arbitration (Article 31), and the appointment, replacement or challenging of the arbitrators (Articles 18 et seq).

As explained in 7.1 Governing Rules, in the absence of an agreement by the parties, the arbitral tribunal may conduct the arbitration in such manner as it considers appropriate. However, the principle of equal treatment of the parties shall be respected and the tribunal shall ensure that each party has an equal opportunity to present its claims and submit its evidence.

The law does not mandate specific qualifications for legal representatives appearing before an arbitral tribunal; any lawyer with an active licence is permitted to represent clients in arbitration.

The rules governing the collection and submission of evidence are determined by the tribunal in consultation with the parties. Law 5016/2023 does not include specific provisions for the collection and submission of evidence at the pleading stage and at the hearing of the cases, apart from:

• Article 30 on the language of evidence;
• Article 34 on the appointment of an expert by the arbitral tribunal;
• Article 35 on document production and the taking of evidence; and
• Article 36 on the possibility of the arbitral tribunal to request the civil court’s assistance regarding the taking of evidence.

The parties also tend to adopt the IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration, which provide a structured approach to evidentiary matters.

In accordance with Article 27 of Law 5016/2023, the parties may freely agree on the procedure. In this respect, the parties may, for example, adjust the level of certainty needed for the arbitral tribunal to make a judgment on specific issues, either by tightening or loosening it.

In the absence of an agreement on these issues, the arbitral tribunal may freely decide on the admissibility, materiality and weight of evidence.

In accordance with Article 35 of Law 5016/2023, unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the arbitral tribunal has the authority to compel the parties to produce documents or other evidence in their possession or control, that is likely to have a substantial impact on the outcome of the arbitration. Such power, however, is limited against the parties of the proceedings and not any third party.

The tribunal shall adopt the appropriate measures to facilitate the taking of evidence while ensuring that the parties’ right to be heard is respected. In cases where the arbitral tribunal does not have the authority to compel the conduct of the taking of evidence or if the parties are not co-operating, the arbitral tribunal may request the assistance of the single-member court of first instance of the district of the place of arbitration or the district where the applicant is domiciled or, absent a domicile, has its habitual residence, or of the Athens single-member court of first instance in the absence of a habitual residence, in accordance with the provisions of Article 36. Naturally, if a party does not co-operate regarding the taking of evidence, the tribunal may draw adverse inferences from such failure against the non-complying party.

In accordance with Article 27.3 of Law 5016/2023, the parties can agree on whether the existence of the arbitration, the arbitral proceedings and the arbitral award will remain confidential. In the absence of an agreement by the parties regarding confidentiality, the arbitral tribunal will decide.

The legal requirements regarding the form and content of an arbitral award are set out in Article 40 of Law 5016/2023. At the outset, the arbitral award must be in writing and must be signed by the arbitrator or arbitrators. If there are multiple arbitrators, the signatures of the majority suffice, provided that the reason for any omitted signature is specifically indicated in the award.

The arbitral award shall also specify the date of its issuance and the place of arbitration, as stipulated according to Article 28.1. The award shall comply with any additional formal requirements under the arbitration agreement agreed by the parties or the procedural rules chosen by the parties.

Each party must receive one original copy of the arbitral award, but delivery may not be regarded as the formal service required for the running of the time limit stipulated in Article 43.3.

The question of potential limitations on the types of remedies an arbitral tribunal can award typically arises either during the hearing of a petition for set aside in Greek courts or in a petition for the recognition and/or enforcement of an award. In these instances, the Greek court will determine whether the recognition or enforcement of a specific remedy would contravene Greek public policy.

With respect to punitive damages, the Greek Supreme Court has ruled that enforcing a foreign court's decision awarding such damages is not inherently contrary to Greek public policy, provided the damages are not excessively disproportionate.

Regarding injunctions, in certain situations Greek law allows the injured party to request the court to order the cessation of the illegal act. Thus, in principle, the remedy of injunction is not generally considered to be against Greek public policy.

Regarding administrative acts, it is settled case law that an arbitral tribunal has the power to rule on the legality of a specific administrative act in a manner that is binding for the administrative courts (under the limitations set out in 5.3 Circumstances for Court Intervention), but it does not have the power to annul it.

Article 41.4 of Law 5016/2023 stipulates that, unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the arbitral tribunal shall decide on the allocation of the costs, having regard to the circumstances of the case, the proceedings and the outcome. That said, Law 5016/2023 adopts the principle of costs-follow-the-event (or the “loser pays” principle). Each party requesting to be compensated for its legal and arbitration costs shall simultaneously prove that such costs were reasonably incurred.

On the other hand, the awarding of legal interest (and/or interest on interest) does not fall under the scope of Law 5016/2023 but is rather regulated by the provisions of substantive law applicable to the case at hand. The arbitral tribunal may grant such types of interest, provided that the prerequisites set by law are met.

Grounds for Setting Aside

The arbitral award cannot be appealed. It may only be challenged through an action for annulment/setting aside, according to the provisions of Article 43 of Law 5016/2023. The grounds for setting aside are limited. For an application to set aside to be successful, the applicant shall establish that:

• a party to the arbitration agreement lacked the capacity to conclude the agreement in accordance with the law governing its capacity, or the arbitration agreement is not valid, or the tribunal declined jurisdiction despite a valid arbitration agreement;
• it was not given proper notice of the appointment of an arbitrator or of the arbitral proceedings, or was otherwise prohibited from presenting its case for reasons not attributable to it;
• the award deals with a dispute that falls outside the scope of the arbitration agreement or contains decisions on claims that were not submitted to arbitration (in such case, only the part pertaining to those claims shall be set aside);
• the composition of the arbitral tribunal or the conduct of the arbitral proceedings was not in accordance with the agreement of the parties or with Law 5016/2023;
• there are grounds for a petition for revision (of a court judgment) under Article 544.6 (perjury or falsified/forged document) and Article 544.10 (bribery) of the Greek Code of Civil Procedure;
• the subject matter of the dispute is not arbitrable; or
• the award runs contrary to the international public policy of Greece in accordance with Article 33 of the Greek Civil Code.

In fact, the court of appeals before which an action to set aside was brought may determine on its motion that the last two grounds listed above exist, even if the applicant did not invoke such grounds.

Procedural Issues

The action for annulment must be filed before the civil three-member court of appeals of the district where the award was rendered, or Athens if said district cannot be determined, within three months of the date of formal service of the award to the applicant.

The court may, upon request or ex officio, refer the dispute back to the arbitral tribunal that issued the arbitral award to remedy this defect, setting a deadline not exceeding 90 days, instead of annulling the arbitral award in whole or in part.

A party may not rely on its own actions/omissions as grounds to have an award set aside. Lastly, by an explicit, written and specific agreement, the parties may waive the action for the setting aside of the arbitral award at any time.

The new Law 5016/2023 does not explicitly provide for the possibility of the parties to expand the scope of challenge of an arbitral award, as was stipulated in Law 2735/1999. However, according to Article 43.7 of Law 5016/2023, by express and specific agreement in writing, the parties may at any time waive their right to seek to set aside an arbitral award. Nevertheless, despite an explicit waiver the party may invoke grounds for annulment against the arbitral award during enforcement proceedings before the civil single-member court of first instance as per the same article.

As recognised by Greek jurisprudence reflecting domestic arbitrations and arbitrations under the previous framework of Law 2735/1999, parties can validly exclude or limit the scope of a petition for setting aside, provided that the agreement is ratified by law. When such exclusion or limitation is clearly stated in the agreement, the law ratifying the agreement and permitting the waiver will be regarded as lex specialis. This specific law will take precedence over the general provision that prohibits waiving the right to petition to set aside.

The court of appeals is generally prohibited from proceeding with a de novo review of the merits of the case when ruling on an action for the setting aside of the arbitral award. In a similar vein, it is settled case law that, even in recognition proceedings of foreign arbitral awards, the Greek courts are not allowed to delve into the substance of the case by reviewing it anew.

Greece has ratified the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the “New York Convention”) by virtue of Legislative Decree No 4220/1961 “Regarding the ratification of the Convention signed in New York on 10 June 1958 on the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards” (published in Government Gazette Journal A’ 173) (the “Legislative Decree”). The New York Convention entered into force on 14 October 1962.

Ratification of said convention proceeded under the reservations set forward in Article 1.3 in accordance with Article 2.1 of the Legislative Decree. These reservations entail that a foreign arbitral award may be recognised if the foreign seat of arbitration belongs to a jurisdiction that has signed the convention (“reciprocity”) and the dispute at hand is commercial (“commerciality”). It is noted, however, that Article 45.1 of Law 5016/2023 stipulates that the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards shall proceed in accordance with the New York Convention without reference to the existent reservations. As per the explanatory report of said law, “[i]t goes without saying that the reservations of reciprocity and commerciality do not apply”.

Recognition and Enforcement Proceedings

Article 3 of the New York Convention stipulates that each contracting state is obliged to recognise the validity of a foreign arbitral award and allow its enforcement in accordance with the procedural rules of the jurisdiction where enforcement is sought. Consequently, recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards may be sought before the single-member court of first instance in accordance with Articles 903, 905 and 906 of the Greek Code of Civil Procedure.

Recognition and enforcement are also subject to the conditions outlined in Article 4 of the New York Convention – ie, the party seeking recognition and enforcement must submit an application along with a duly certified original arbitral award, or a copy of the award that meets the authenticity requirements of the New York Convention and the original arbitration agreement, or a copy that meets said authenticity requirements. If the previous supporting documents are in a foreign language, they should be accompanied by an official translation into Greek.

In accordance with Article 5.1.e of the New York Convention, the award may not be enforced if it has been set aside or suspended by the competent authority of the country where the award was issued (or in accordance with the law of which the award was issued), whereas Article 6 of the New York Convention provides that the court may suspend the proceedings if the setting aside of the award has been requested in the country where the award was issued (or in accordance with the law of which the award was issued).

State Immunity

According to Article 94.4.c of the Greek Constitution, enforcement proceedings may be validly initiated against the Greek State on the basis of court judgments. Arbitral awards can also be enforced against the Greek State; however, in both the aforementioned cases, only the state’s private property can be the object of enforcement proceedings and not any property or bank accounts destined to serve a public purpose.

It is also noted that, pursuant to Article 923 of the Greek Code of Civil Procedure, any entity wishing to initiate enforcement proceedings against a foreign state shall not do so unless it has been granted prior permission from the Greek Minister of Justice.

Generally, Greek courts refrain from recognising a foreign arbitral award as enforceable in Greece in cases where its enforcement would contravene fundamental political, moral, social, legal or economic perceptions that prevail in the country. Naturally, such perceptions change over time. This essentially means that such a contrast may not necessarily be established simply because the award to be recognised or enforced applied a foreign provision that is unknown or would be inapplicable under Greek law.

Unlike some jurisdictions that explicitly allow for class actions or group arbitration, Greek arbitration law does not contain provisions that enable multiple parties to combine their claims into a single arbitration proceeding. There are mechanisms for collective redress in judicial or mediation proceedings, such as group actions under consumer protection laws, but these mechanisms do not extend to arbitration.

Apart from the principles of impartiality and independence described in 4.1 Limits on Selection and 4.4 Challenge and Removal of Arbitrators, there are no mandatory ethical codes for arbitrators under Greek law. Soft law texts such as the 2024 IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration and the 2024 UNCITRAL Code of Conduct for Arbitrators in International Investment Dispute Resolution provide useful guidance in this respect.

Counsel participating in arbitration proceedings are subject to the professional standards adopted by Law 4194/2013 (Greek Code of Lawyers).

Law 5016/2023 provides no guidance on third-party funding. The possible usage of this scheme in arbitral proceedings in Greece has been the subject of debate, given that provisions to be potentially applied by analogy (eg, Article 60 of the Greek Code of Lawyers for “champerty”) introduce limitations to the third-party funder fees.

As per Article 24.2 of Law 5016/2023, following a party’s application, the arbitral tribunal may consolidate and adjudicate another dispute pending between the parties before the same arbitrators or before another arbitral tribunal (however, the latter is only possible upon the parties’ express agreement). The decision to consolidate shall be issued following the arbitral tribunal’s request to all interested parties to express their views, having regard to all circumstances.

See 5.7 Jurisdiction Over Third Parties regarding the circumstances under which an arbitration agreement may be binding upon third parties. With respect to the res judicata effect of the arbitral award, Article 44.2.c of Law 5016/2023 explicitly stipulates that the arbitral award has such effect against third parties only if those parties are bound by the arbitration agreement.