U.S. Court Refuses to Enforce Award Issued in Taiwan By J.P. Duffy, Erica Iverson and Priya Chadha (New York) In Clientron Corp. v. Devon IT, Inc., a U.S. federal trial court recently refused to confirm an arbitration award rendered in Taiwan on grounds that Taiwan is not a signatory to the 1958 United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (“New York Convention”). The Clientron decision reinforces the significance of seating an arbitration in a New York Conven- tion signatory state, as well as the importance of considering likely enforcement venues at the clause drafting phase. BACKGROUND The underlying dispute in Clientron concerned the breach of a supply and purchase agreement (“SPA”) for the manufacture and delivery of computer parts. Taiwanese corporation Clientron alleged that Pennsylvania corporation Devon had failed to make payments for three products that were not specifically mentioned in the SPA and commenced arbitration against Devon before the Chinese Arbi- tration Association in Taiwan to resolve its dispute. Clientron prevailed in the arbitration and was awarded US$6,574,546.17 by the tribunal. Clientron subsequently com- menced enforcement proceedings in both Taiwan and a federal court in Pennsylvania. In the Pennsylvania enforcement proceed- ings, Clientron sought to enforce the award pursuant to the New York Convention, as well as Pennsylvania’s version of the Uniform Foreign Money Judgment Recognition Act (“UFMJRA”). As an alternative theory, Clientron also sought to enforce the award under the Treaty of Friendship between the United States and the Republic of China (Taiwan). In response to Clientron’s enforcement actions, Devon commenced proceedings in Taiwan to set aside the award and also opposed enforcement in Pennsylvania. 37 K&L Gates: ARBITRATION WORLD 37