International Arbitration in Mauritius: Seat, Framework, and Enforcement

Mauritius has, through the International Arbitration Act 2008 and its participation in the New York Convention, established a credible framework for international commercial arbitration. The jurisdiction offers parties a modern arbitration statute, an institutional centre in the LCIA-MIAC, and a judiciary that adopts a pro-enforcement approach.

The Statutory Framework

The International Arbitration Act 2008, modelled on the UNCITRAL Model Law, came into force on 1 October 2008. Section 2 of the Act defines an international arbitration as one where the parties have their places of business in different states, or where the place of arbitration is situated outside the state in which the parties have their places of business.

The Act enshrines the principles of separability and competence-competence. Section 17 provides that an arbitration clause shall be treated as an agreement independent of the other terms of the contract, and that the arbitral tribunal may rule on its own jurisdiction, including any objection to the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement.

Section 18 confers on the arbitral tribunal the power to order interim measures of protection. The Supreme Court may also grant interim measures under Section 19, providing a supportive supervisory jurisdiction.

The LCIA-MIAC

The London Court of International Arbitration Mauritius International Arbitration Centre was established in 2011 as an independent institution administering arbitrations under the LCIA-MIAC Arbitration Rules. The Centre provides institutional support, including the appointment of arbitrators, the administration of deposits, and the case management of proceedings.

Enforcement

Part IV of the International Arbitration Act 2008 provides for the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. Mauritius acceded to the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards on 19 July 2002.

The Privy Council's decision in Betamax Ltd v State Trading Corporation Mauritius [2021] UKPC 14 considered the scope of the public policy exception under the New York Convention. The Board held that the enforcement of a foreign arbitral award could not be refused on grounds of public policy unless enforcement would be contrary to the fundamental notions of morality or justice. The decision reinforced Mauritius' pro-enforcement stance.

In Flashbird Ltd v Compagnie De Securite Privee Et Industrielle Sarl [2021] UKPC 32, the Privy Council again addressed the enforcement of awards, confirming that the courts of Mauritius will give effect to international arbitration agreements and awards unless a narrow exception applies.

Choosing Mauritius

Parties selecting Mauritius as a seat of arbitration benefit from a modern statute aligned with the UNCITRAL Model Law, institutional support from the LCIA-MIAC, and a judiciary that respects the autonomy of the arbitral process.

This article is for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.