Relying on a minority view of the Convention on the
Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral
Awards (New York Convention) definition of an
arbitration agreement, the court below confirmed a
foreign arbitral award and disregarded Louisiana and
federal law as to the preclusive effect of an
interlocutory order compelling arbitration.

1. Can a foreign arbitration award be enforced
pursuant to the Convention (9 USC 207) where the
arbitration agreement does not meet the Convention's
definitional requisite [Art. II(2)] of bilateral signatures?
And, is that defect jurisdictional, or merely fatal to the
merits of the enforcement action?

2. Is a 9 USC 206 order staying litigation and
compelling arbitration preclusive, or subject to judicial
review following issuance of an arbitration award?

3. Does a court sitting in secondary jurisdiction
have authority to effectively amend an arbitration
award by making rulings that the arbitrators did not
make, such as a failure to prosecute a claim in the
arbitration?

Can a foreign arbitration award be enforced pursuant to the Convention (9 USC 207) where the arbitration agreement does not meet the Convention's definitional requisite [Art. II(2)] of bilateral signatures? And, is that defect jurisdictional, or merely fatal to the merits of the enforcement action?