The award stems from a contract between Agrenco and Uruguayan company Fuentesauco, which Agrenco alleges Fuentesauco breached by failing to supply soy beans Agrenco had purchased. Agrenco brought arbitration proceedings before the Federation of Oil Seeds and Fats Associations (FOSFA) in the UK, and obtained a favourable ruling. When Fuentesauco failed to comply with the award, Agrenco hired Ferrere to appear before the Uruguayan Supreme Court to request exequatur, in order to make FOSFA’s ruling enforceable in Uruguay.
As part of the proceedings, the arbitration award was presented to the Chief Government Advisor, who must be involved in all recognition and enforcement requests. He opposed exequatur on the grounds that Agrenco had failed to properly show that the award obtained in the UK was final. Ferrere filed a new motion before the Supreme Court opposing the decision and on 10 September the Court ruled that the award, which includes monetary compensation, was final, and therefore enforceable in Uruguay.
The court considered that it was the burden of the defendant, rather than the claimant, to prove that the award had been annulled or set aside.
Among Ferrere’s arguments was a certification from FOSFA which stated that the time frame to vacate the award had already elapsed, as well as affidavits written by UK lawyers explaining the nature of the UK legal system. These affirmed that the ruling was final, and that due process had been observed.
Furthermore, the Supreme Court also decided that the UK arbitrators had jurisdiction, despite the fact that the arbitration clause was only included in an unsigned annex to the original contract. As Fuentesauco had appeared in the arbitration proceedings in the UK, the Supreme Court reasoned that it had had ample opportunity to present its case, in line with the requirements of the New York Convention.