Jordan is a signatory to the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958), and has domestic legislation enabling enforcement of foreign judgments and awards. However, the process involves procedural conditions, scrutiny by Jordanian courts, and potential grounds for refusal. Below is a detailed legal analysis of how enforcement works in Jordan, practical considerations, and risks.
1. Legal Basis & Convention Status
Jordan ratified the New York Convention 1958, thereby committing to recognise and enforce foreign arbitral awards in line with the Convention’s terms.
In Jordan, Law No. 8 of 1952, the Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Law (“Enforcement Law”) is the primary Law that governs recognition and execution of foreign juducial judgments and arbitral awards in Jordan.
Under the Arbitration Law No. 31 of 2001 (as amended), awards rendered under that law are “deemed to have authority of res judicata” and are enforceable once procedural conditions are met. Article 52 of the Arbitration Law sets out that enforceable awards must comply with that law. newyorkconvention.org
Jordanian courts have, in several instances, treated the New York Convention as having precedence over national law in matters of enforcing arbitral awards. Global Arbitration Review+1
2. Types of Awards and Judgments Subject to Enforcement
Under the Jordanian Enforcement Law of 1952, the term “foreign judgment” extends beyond ordinary court rulings to include:
- Monetary judgments (awards ordering the payment of sums of money),
- Judgments concerning movable property, and
- Arbitral awards, provided such awards are treated as judicial decisions in the jurisdiction where they were issued.
This means that foreign arbitral awards may be recognized and enforced in Jordan, provided they comply with the requirements of Jordanian law as well as the provisions of the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards.
3. Procedure for Enforcement
3.1 Application for Recognition (Exequatur)
The process begins with the filing of an application before the competent Court of First Instance requesting recognition (“exequatur”) of the foreign judgment or arbitral award. The application must be supported by the following documents:
- A copy of the arbitration agreement,
- The arbitral award in original or duly certified copy, and An Arabic translation of the award and arbitration agreement if not originally in Arabic, certified by a sworn translator.
- The Jordanian courts will not re-examine the merits of the dispute. Instead, their review is confined to ensuring compliance with mandatory legal requirements, including:
- That due notice was given to the parties,
- That the arbitral tribunal or foreign court had proper jurisdiction,
- That the judgment or award is final and binding, and
- That enforcement does not contravene Jordanian public policy.
Once these conditions are satisfied, the court will issue an order declaring the foreign judgment or arbitral award enforceable within Jordan.
4. Grounds for Refusal of Recognition and Enforcement
Jordanian courts recognize that the enforcement of foreign judgments and arbitral awards is the rule, and refusal is the exception. Nonetheless, the Enforcement Law of 1952 and the Arbitration Law of 2001 set out specific grounds on which recognition or enforcement may be denied. These generally reflect the principles of the New York Convention.
The most common grounds include:
- Lack of Jurisdiction, where the foreign court or arbitral tribunal did not have proper jurisdiction under its governing law.
- Procedural Defects, if the losing party was not properly served or was denied a fair opportunity to present its defence.
- Non-Final Decisions, where the judgment or award is not yet final or remains subject to appeal in the jurisdiction of origin.
- Fraud – if the decision was obtained through fraudulent means.
- Public Policy and Morality, if enforcement would contravene Jordanian public order or accepted standards of morality.
- Reciprocity, in the case of foreign court judgments, enforcement may be refused if the foreign jurisdiction does not allow reciprocal enforcement of Jordanian judgments. (This condition is not generally applied to arbitral awards covered by the New York Convention.)
- Incomplete Documentation, if mandatory supporting documents are missing or improperly submitted.
For arbitral awards specifically, the defences largely mirror those under Article V of the New York Convention, including invalidity of the arbitration agreement, procedural irregularities, and inconsistency with Jordanian public policy.
Importantly, if only part of an award is found to conflict with public policy, Jordanian courts have the discretion to enforce the remainder.
3.3 Execution of Enforceable Awards and Judgments
Once a foreign judgment or arbitral award is recognized by the Jordanian courts, enforcement follows the procedures set out in the Execution Law No. 25 of 2007. These measures are broadly the same as for domestic judgments and include:
- Seizure and sale of movable or immovable property belonging to the debtor,
- Garnishment of debts or receivables owed to the debtor,
- Provisional attachment of assets under Article 141 of the Civil Procedure Law,
- Appointment of a receiver or use of equitable remedies in certain cases.
- Enforcement is carried out by the Execution Department attached to the Court of First Instance that issued the recognition order.
4. Key Practical Considerations and Risks
When seeking enforcement in Jordan, parties should be mindful of the following:
Finality and enforceability abroad, Arbitral awards must be final under the law of the seat of arbitration. Awards still subject to challenge or appeal may be denied enforcement.
Translation and authentication, All documents must be authenticated and supported by a certified Arabic translation.
- Public policy scrutiny – Courts may refuse enforcement if the award or judgment conflicts with Jordanian public order, particularly in sensitive areas such as morality, Sharia compliance, or regulated sectors.
- Reciprocity principle – For foreign court judgments, Jordanian law requires reciprocity with the foreign jurisdiction. For arbitral awards, however, this requirement is largely set aside under the New York Convention.
- Time limits – While the Enforcement Law does not prescribe a universal limitation period, enforcement actions are generally subject to the 15-year limitation period applicable under Jordanian law.
- Costs and security – Courts may, in certain cases, require the applicant to provide security or a bond to safeguard against damages if enforcement is later overturned.
- Partial enforcement – Jordanian courts may enforce an award in part while excluding provisions that conflict with local law or public policy.
- Jurisdictional challenges – Debtors commonly contest recognition by alleging lack of jurisdiction of the foreign tribunal or due process violations.
- Third-party enforcement – Enforcement against third parties (e.g., alter egos of the debtor) is not permitted unless specifically adjudicated in the foreign judgment/award or expressly authorized under applicable law.
5. Comparative Insight: Enforcement of Arbitral Awards vs. Foreign Judgments
Arbitral awards benefit from the protections of the New York Convention, which restricts the scope of judicial review and provides a more predictable enforcement framework. Jordanian courts have consistently recognized the primacy of the Convention in this area.
Foreign court judgments, on the other hand, are enforced under the Enforcement Law of 1952, which requires reciprocity and allows courts greater discretion.
In practice, enforcement of arbitral awards in Jordan is generally more straightforward and reliable than enforcement of foreign court judgments, provided procedural requirements are met.
6. Suggested Legal Approach
Always include robust arbitration clauses (seat selection, governing law, immunity waivers) rather than relying on default court jurisdiction.
In arbitration cases, pre-execute deregistration powers, asset attachments, and enforcement documents to streamline execution in Jordan.
Negotiate stabilization, change-of-law, and indemnity clauses to reduce risk of public policy rejection.
Where enforcing foreign court judgments, build strong proof of jurisdiction, service, finality, and non-contravention of Jordanian policy.
Retain local counsel early for the exequatur process and follow up execution steps strategically.