TRW Insight / Bangladesh
Bangladesh enforces foreign awards under the New York Convention through a single court in Dhaka and narrow statutory defences. Recent High Court Division decisions make the route more predictable, and the limitation period far less forgiving.
Foreign arbitral award enforcement Bangladesh: the 2026 position
Foreign arbitral award enforcement in Bangladesh runs through a short statutory route: three sections of the Arbitration Act 2001, one court in Dhaka and the New York Convention, which Bangladesh joined in 1992 without reservations. On paper an award made in London, Singapore or Paris is treated as if it were a decree of the District Court in Dhaka, and the debtor can resist it only on narrow, listed grounds. In practice the outcome turns on four things: whether the papers are in order, whether the application is filed in time, how the debtor uses the objection procedure, and whether there are assets in Bangladesh worth attaching.
This guide covers what counts as a foreign award, the application and documents, refusal grounds and public policy, the three-year limitation rule confirmed in February 2026, state debtors, asset strategy, timelines and the High Court Division decisions that now define the field.
Summary: A foreign award is enforced in Bangladesh by an execution application to the District Judge's court in Dhaka under section 45 of the Arbitration Act 2001, supported by an authenticated award, the arbitration agreement and proof that the award is foreign. The debtor may resist only on the grounds in section 46, which mirror Article V of the New York Convention. The High Court Division confirmed in July 2026 that the enforcing court cannot review the merits or set aside a foreign award, and in February 2026 that the application must be filed within three years of the award, with no power to condone delay.
Key point: The clock is the biggest risk. In Jess Smith & Sons Cotton v Patriot Spinning Mills (26 February 2026) the High Court Division applied the three-year period in article 182 of the Limitation Act 1908 to an application to enforce a Liverpool cotton award and held that section 5 of that Act cannot be used to excuse a late filing. An award-holder who waits for settlement talks may lose the right to enforce in Bangladesh altogether.
At a glance
New York Convention state
Bangladesh acceded on 6 May 1992 with no reservations; the Convention took effect for it on 4 August 1992.
One court
Every foreign award is enforced by the District Judge's court in Dhaka, as if it were that court's own decree.
Three documents
The authenticated award, the arbitration agreement and proof that the award is foreign, with certified translations where needed.
Narrow defences
Section 46 lists the only refusal grounds, and the High Court Division has barred any review of the merits.
Three-year limit
File within three years of the award: the High Court Division held in 2026 that late filings cannot be condoned.
Table of Contents
How foreign arbitral award enforcement Bangladesh law works
The Arbitration Act 2001 applies in full only where the place of arbitration is in Bangladesh. Section 3(2) makes an exception: sections 45, 46 and 47 also apply where the arbitration took place abroad.[1] Those three sections are the entire statutory code for foreign awards. Section 45 makes the award binding and enforceable, section 46 lists the grounds for refusal, and section 47 lets the Government declare "specified states" by gazette notification.[1]
The New York Convention sits behind the statute. Bangladesh acceded on 6 May 1992 and the Convention entered into force for it on 4 August 1992, with no declarations or reservations recorded.[2] The Act draws no distinction between Convention and non-Convention states, so an award from a seat outside the Convention is enforced on the same footing as one from London or Singapore.[3]
In July 2026 the High Court Division described sections 45 and 46 as provisions that "substantially incorporate the enforcement regime of the New York Convention, 1958", and held that they give the Bangladeshi court no supervisory authority over the foreign arbitration itself.[6] For the wider statutory picture, see our guide to arbitration law in Bangladesh.
What counts as a foreign arbitral award
Section 2(k) defines a foreign arbitral award as an award made under an arbitration agreement in the territory of any state other than Bangladesh, excluding an award made in a specified state.[1] The test is territorial: it turns on the seat, not on the nationality of the parties, the governing law or the institution. An ICC award in a Dhaka-seated arbitration is a Bangladeshi award, enforced under section 44 as a domestic decree; an award in a Singapore-seated arbitration between two Bangladeshi companies is foreign.
The Act itself names no specified state, and any declaration would have to be made by gazette notification under section 47.[1] Confirm before filing that none affects the seat. The High Court Division has also treated an award made in ICSID proceedings between a power producer and the Bangladesh Power Development Board as enforceable through the section 45 route, with objections taken under section 46.[8]
Recognition as a shield as well as a sword
Section 45(1)(a) makes an enforceable foreign award binding "for all purposes" between the parties, and allows either of them to rely on it "by way of defence, set off or otherwise" in any legal proceedings in Bangladesh.[1] A party that has won abroad can therefore plead the award against a local suit on the same dispute, not only execute it.
The court, the application and who does what
The explanation to section 45 fixes the court: the District Judge's court exercising jurisdiction in the district of Dhaka.[1] Every foreign award goes there, wherever the debtor's assets are. Section 45(1)(b) provides that the award is enforced "by execution" under the Code of Civil Procedure 1908, "in the same manner as if it were a decree of the Court".[1] The application is accordingly registered as a money execution case, the form used in each of the recent High Court Division decisions.[5] [6] [7]
District Judge, Dhaka
Hears every section 45 execution case and decides objections under section 46.
High Court Division
Hears section 48(c) appeals against refusals and civil revisions against execution orders.
High Court Division
Grants section 7A measures in international cases, available for foreign awards at the enforcement stage.
Courts of the seat
The only courts that can set aside a foreign award; Bangladeshi courts cannot.
Appellate Division
Sets binding authority on public policy, stays and limitation.
Bangladesh Bank
Regulates transfer of recovered sums abroad through the banking system.
One composite proceeding
Some District Judges have treated recognition and execution as separate steps. The High Court Division rejected that approach in South Express v Madina Enterprise, decided on 9 July 2026, holding that the Act "nowhere requires two separate proceedings—one for recognition and another for execution" and that the District Judge had imported a requirement the legislature never enacted.[6] One execution case under section 45, properly documented, is enough.
Only the party against whom the award is invoked can resist recognition.[4]
No challenge to the award in Bangladesh
A Bangladeshi debtor cannot apply in Bangladesh to annul a foreign award. The High Court Division has held that the power of annulment "belongs exclusively to the courts exercising supervisory jurisdiction at the seat of arbitration", and that a District Judge's order purporting to set aside a London award was "without jurisdiction and a nullity".[6] Nor can the debtor sue in a civil court for a declaration that the award is void. In NEPC Consortium Power v Bangladesh Power Development Board, decided on 3 December 2025, the court rejected such a plaint as barred by the Act, a special law, and held that the debtor's remedy is an objection under section 46 once execution is sought.[8]
Documents, authentication and translation
Section 45(2) requires the application to be accompanied by three things: the original award or a copy "duly authenticated in the manner required by the law of the country in which it was made"; the original arbitration agreement or a duly certified copy; and "such evidence as may be necessary to prove that the award is a foreign award".[1] These track Article IV of the New York Convention, and in South Express the High Court Division confirmed that an authenticated award, the arbitration agreement and documents proving the award was foreign were "precisely the documents required".[6]
Translation
Section 45(3) deals with language. The English text is awkwardly drafted, but it is read as requiring an English translation of any award or agreement not in English or Bangla, certified as correct by a diplomatic or consular agent of the applicant's country, or certified in another manner sufficient under Bangladeshi law.[1] [3] Translate key notice correspondence too, because notice is the most common objection.
Notarisation, attestation and the Apostille Convention
Practitioners report that foreign awards are notarised and attested by the Bangladesh mission in the country of the seat before filing.[13] Bangladesh acceded to the Hague Apostille Convention on 29 July 2024, and it entered into force for Bangladesh on 30 March 2025.[11] Where the Convention operates between Bangladesh and the state of origin, an apostille should in principle replace consular legalisation.
The Convention does not operate everywhere. Germany, Austria, the Czech Republic, Belgium, Finland, the Netherlands, Estonia, Greece, France, Denmark, Argentina and Lithuania have lodged objections to Bangladesh's accession, so between Bangladesh and those states legalisation is still required.[11] Until practice settles, obtain an apostille where available and confirm whether consular attestation should be added.
Why formal defects matter
Formalities cut both ways. In the Litmond Shipping v Tiryaki Agro litigation over a London Maritime Arbitrators Association award, the District Judge rejected the debtor's section 46 objection case in 2023 because the copy of the award filed with it was not attested.[7] Award-holders should file authenticated or certified copies of everything, and add evidence of notice, the award's status at the seat, an authenticated power of attorney and a calculation of the sum due.
Grounds for refusing recognition under section 46
Section 46(1) provides that recognition or execution "may be refused only" on the grounds it lists, which follow Article V of the New York Convention.[1] Under section 46(1)(a) the debtor must prove incapacity, an invalid agreement, lack of proper notice or inability to present its case, an award beyond the submission, an irregular tribunal or procedure, or that the award is not binding or has been set aside or suspended at the seat. Under section 46(1)(b) the court may itself find the subject matter non-arbitrable under Bangladeshi law or enforcement contrary to the public policy of Bangladesh.[1] The table summarises how each ground operates in foreign arbitral award enforcement Bangladesh cases.
| Ground | Provision | Who must show it | How the courts approach it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Incapacity of a party | s 46(1)(a)(i) | Debtor | Proof required; rarely raised |
| Invalid arbitration agreement | s 46(1)(a)(ii) | Debtor | Judged by the law the parties chose; drafting errors do not defeat clear intent |
| No proper notice or unable to present case | s 46(1)(a)(iii) | Debtor | Most common objection; fails where notice was received or solicitors instructed |
| Award beyond the submission | s 46(1)(a)(iv) | Debtor | Severable parts within scope may still be enforced |
| Tribunal or procedure not as agreed | s 46(1)(a)(v) | Debtor | Default appointment under the seat's law is respected |
| Not binding, set aside or suspended at seat | s 46(1)(a)(vi) and s 46(2) | Debtor | Court may adjourn and order security if a challenge is pending |
| Not arbitrable in Bangladesh | s 46(1)(b)(i) | Court's own finding | Checked against Bangladeshi statutes |
| Conflict with public policy | s 46(1)(b)(ii) | Court's own finding | Narrow: fraud, corruption, natural justice or fundamental principles |
Burden and the narrow reading
The burden is on the debtor. The High Court Division stated in July 2026 that unless one or more statutory grounds "are affirmatively proved, the Court is under a legal obligation to recognize and enforce the foreign arbitral award", and that the grounds "must receive a narrow and restrictive interpretation and cannot be expanded by judicial innovation".[6]
In the same case the court rejected three common objections: an unperformed amicable-settlement step with no defined procedure, a matter for the law of the seat; obvious drafting errors naming a non-existent governing law and institution; and complaints about the tribunal's composition from a debtor that had received notice, instructed solicitors and failed to appoint its arbitrator.[6]
Awards challenged at the seat
Where an application to set aside or suspend the award is pending before a competent authority at the seat, section 46(2) allows the court, if it considers it proper, to adjourn the enforcement decision. On the award-holder's application it may also order the debtor to give suitable security.[1] Award-holders facing a tactical annulment application abroad should ask for security as a condition of any adjournment. An award actually set aside at the seat will not be recognised.[3]
Debtors should note the converse. In South Express the court held that a debtor that had not used the remedies of the curial law could not invite the enforcing court "to reopen jurisdictional questions already determined by the tribunal".[6]
Public policy and the limits of review
Public policy is the ground debtors raise most often. Practitioners report that lower courts have at times read "public policy or the national interest" very widely, while the superior courts are firmly pro-enforcement.[13]
The leading test comes from the parallel setting-aside provision. In Saudi Arabian Airlines v Saudi Bangladesh Services, 73 DLR (AD) (2021) 277, the Appellate Division treated an award as contrary to public policy where it is patently illegal or so unfair that it shocks the conscience of the court.[3] Applying the foreign award provision, the High Court Division held in July 2026 that the exception is reserved for "exceptional cases involving fraud, corruption, denial of natural justice, or violations of the forum's most fundamental legal principles".[6]
The merits are off limits
The same judgment set aside a District Judge's refusal because the judge had found that the arbitrator made "mistakes of law" and "mistakes of fact" and had not acted "competently or professionally". The High Court Division held that this was an appellate review "wholly foreign to section 46", and that whether the arbitrator correctly read the contract, assessed the evidence or applied English law were matters for the courts of the seat alone.[6]
The court also held that "merely reproducing the expression 'public policy' cannot satisfy section 46": an order refusing enforcement must identify the principle of Bangladeshi public policy that would be violated.[6] A debtor alleging fraud or corruption should plead it with particulars and evidence; the Act does not list fraud as a separate ground, and commentators treat it as falling within public policy.[4]
Arbitrability
Arbitrability under section 46(1)(b)(i) is judged by Bangladeshi law, and section 3(3) preserves other laws under which certain disputes may not be arbitrated.[1] Purely commercial awards rarely raise the issue; awards touching regulated sectors or labour matters deserve a check before filing.
Limitation: the three-year rule after Jess Smith
The Arbitration Act 2001 sets no time limit for a section 45 application, but section 55 applies the Limitation Act 1908 to arbitrations "as they apply to proceedings in Court".[1] Some award-holders assumed they had twelve years, by analogy with section 48 of the Code of Civil Procedure. That assumption is now untenable.
The decision
In Jess Smith & Sons Cotton LLC v Patriot Spinning Mills Ltd (Arbitration Appeal No. 24 of 2024, 26 February 2026), a Californian cotton seller held an International Cotton Association award made in Liverpool on 6 February 2012 for US$511,023.26 with interest. It filed a money execution case under section 45 before the District Judge, Dhaka on 2 October 2023, with an application to condone a delay of 3,155 days.[5]
The court held that an application to execute a foreign award falls under article 182 of the Limitation Act and "must be filed within three years from the date of the award". Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not apply to execution proceedings unless a statute expressly says so, and none does; mistaken legal advice is no excuse in any event.[5]
The court rejected reliance on Indian authority because section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act 1963 is materially wider, and left undisturbed the District Judge's reversal of an earlier provisional order admitting the case, so a provisional admission is no protection.[5]
What award-holders should do
Count three years from the award itself, not from the end of settlement talks; the award-holder in Jess Smith negotiated for years on advice that it had twelve.[5] Start authentication and translation when the award issues, file first and negotiate with the execution case pending. If the debtor challenges the award at the seat, file in Dhaka within time anyway and seek an adjournment with security under section 46(2).[1] It can be done: in Litmond Shipping the award of 13 February 2014 was put into execution on 9 January 2017.[7]
Recent High Court Division decisions on foreign awards
Five decisions from February 2025 to July 2026 now frame foreign arbitral award enforcement Bangladesh practice. Read together, they favour the prepared award-holder and close off most of the debtor's procedural escape routes, except the clock.
- South Express v Madina Enterprise (9 July 2026): the District Judge, Dhaka had refused to enforce a 2015 London award in a vessel sale dispute and purported to set it aside. The High Court Division reversed, declared the award enforceable as a decree and restored the execution case.[6]
- NEPC Consortium Power v BPDB (3 December 2025): the power board's civil suit to declare an award of about Tk 176 crore void was rejected, its stay application failed and the District Judge, Dhaka was directed to proceed with execution.[8]
- Litmond Shipping v Tiryaki Agro (24 February 2025): a self-contradictory attachment order was set aside, but the court vacated its own stay and directed disposal of the execution case within ninety days.[7]
- Jess Smith v Patriot Spinning (26 February 2026): the three-year limit under article 182 applies and cannot be extended under section 5 of the Limitation Act.[5]
- Legend World Tank v Multinational Shipping (12 July 2026): applying the Larger Bench decision in Accom Travels and Tours v Oman Air, 27 BLC 596, the court refused section 7A relief in support of a Singapore-seated arbitration, recording that Accom allows such measures for foreign-seated arbitrations only at the enforcement stage.[9]
Enforcing against the state and state-owned entities
A large share of high-value foreign awards in Bangladesh are against state-owned entities, particularly in power and energy. The Arbitration Act 2001 contains no provision allowing the state or a state entity to raise sovereign immunity at the enforcement stage.[3] Bangladesh is reported to follow the restrictive theory of immunity, under which consent to arbitration waives immunity from jurisdiction, and power purchase and implementation agreements usually contain broad waivers covering attachment and execution.[10]
Waivers are not always complete: some older power purchase agreements carve out "protected assets" needed to keep the grid running.[10]
No collateral stays
State debtors have tried to stall execution through collateral suits. In Smith Co-Generation (BD) v Bangladesh Power Development Board, 15 BLC 704, the High Court Division set aside a stay of execution of a foreign award that the board had obtained under Order XXI rule 29 without making any application under section 46.[8] The 2025 NEPC decision applied the same principle to the same board.[8]
The Government as debtor
Where the debtor is the Government itself, or a public officer sued for an official act, section 82 of the Code of Civil Procedure adds a step: the court fixes a time for satisfaction and execution cannot issue until the decree has remained unsatisfied for three months after the court's report to the Government.[14] Statutory corporations such as power boards are debtors like any other.
Payment by a public body usually needs a budget allocation, so keep the execution case moving while pursuing the ministry. Our guide to unpaid infrastructure project claims in Bangladesh covers the administrative track.
Finding, freezing and recovering assets
Foreign arbitral award enforcement Bangladesh outcomes depend on assets. Once the execution case is filed, the full execution machinery of the Code of Civil Procedure is available, including attachment and sale of property under section 60 and arrest and detention under section 55.[14] Under section 64, a private transfer of attached property is void against claims enforceable under the attachment.[14]
Interim protection at the enforcement stage
Section 7A allows interim measures, including injunctions restraining transfers "intended to create impediment on the way of enforcement of award", custody or sale of goods and the appointment of a receiver, "until enforcement of the award under section 44 or 45".[1] Under Accom, that relief is available for a foreign-seated arbitration once enforcement is sought.[9] File it with the execution case, with evidence of the assets and the risk of dissipation.
Tracing assets in practice
Start with company filings for directors, charges and group companies; land registry records for immovable property and existing mortgages; and the arbitration file itself, where letters of credit and guarantees often name the debtor's banks. For state debtors abroad, guides point to Nostro accounts held by Bangladeshi banks overseas, where commercial purpose and any waiver decide enforceability.[10] Where a corporate debtor is insolvent, a winding-up petition may be the stronger lever; see our guide to winding up a company in Bangladesh.
Getting the money out of Bangladesh
Recovery ends with remittance through the banking system. On 2 August 2026, the High Court Division held that when a suit is decreed "or an award is made, the amount so decreed or awarded assumes the character of a judgment debt", that tax, VAT and advance income tax may not be deducted from it, and that Bangladesh Bank's conditional permission requiring such deductions "has no legal foundation". It directed the bank and Bangladesh Bank to remit the sums abroad.[12]
That case concerned compromise decrees in admiralty suits, but its reasoning extends expressly to arbitral awards.[12] Ask the executing court to direct remittance to a named account abroad, and see our guide to receiving foreign currency in Bangladesh for the banking mechanics.
Timelines, appeals and revisions
One international guide puts foreign arbitral award enforcement Bangladesh timelines at around twelve to twenty-four months.[4] Practitioners on the ground say two to three years is usual, and five to six years if appeals follow, because of backlogs and repeated applications.[13] The reported cases bear out the longer figure: the South Express award of 2015 was declared enforceable on appeal in 2026, and the Litmond execution case filed in 2017 was still pending in 2025.[6] [7]
Routes to the High Court Division
Section 48(c) gives an appeal to the High Court Division against an order "refusing to recognize or enforce any foreign arbitral award under section 45".[1] The section gives no appeal against an order allowing enforcement. Debtors instead challenge interlocutory orders, such as attachments, by civil revision under section 115 of the Code, often with interim stays.[7]
The counter is to seek a direction that the execution case be decided within a fixed period, as in Litmond, and to resist stays resting on collateral suits.[7] [8]
Bangladeshi parties and the global recognition of awards
The New York Convention works in both directions. A Bangladeshi exporter, contractor or bank that wins an award can enforce it in any of the Convention's 172 states where the debtor has assets, and an award seated in Dhaka is a Convention award abroad.[2] Against a foreign buyer, enforcing where its assets are is often faster than anything available at home.
Bangladeshi parties facing a foreign award
For the losing Bangladeshi party, the choices are made early. The award can only be annulled at the seat, so any challenge must be brought there in time; otherwise the only option is to object under section 46 when enforcement is sought.[4] [6] Ignoring the arbitration is the worst choice: in South Express, failure to appoint an arbitrator or challenge the tribunal at the seat defeated the defences in Dhaka.[6] A sound defence rests on a real section 46 ground or, after Jess Smith, on limitation; collateral suits and general appeals to the national interest rarely survive the superior courts.[5] [8]
Lessons for the arbitration clause
Name the seat, institution, rules and language precisely and, against a state entity, include an express waiver of immunity from attachment and execution. Our analysis of arbitration agreement enforceability in Bangladesh explains how the clause shapes foreign arbitral award enforcement Bangladesh disputes later on.
A step-by-step plan for foreign arbitral award enforcement Bangladesh
The sequence below is the one we follow for award-holders, designed to close off defences early and stay inside the three-year window.
Diary the deadline
Record the date of the award and plan to file within three years; settlement talks do not stop the clock.
Check the award's status
Confirm the award is binding, whether any annulment application is pending at the seat, and whether the seat is a specified state.
Authenticate the papers
Obtain an authenticated award and certified arbitration agreement, with an apostille or consular attestation as the state of origin requires.
Translate and certify
Prepare certified English translations of any document not in English or Bangla, including key notice correspondence.
Map the assets
Identify bank accounts, receivables, land and group companies in Bangladesh before the debtor learns of the case.
File in Dhaka
Bring a single money execution case under section 45 before the District Judge, Dhaka with the full document pack and a calculation.
Seek interim protection
Apply for section 7A measures or attachment with the filing, supported by evidence of the risk of dissipation.
Hold the line on appeal
Resist collateral suits and stays, and ask the High Court Division for time-bound directions on any revision.
Debtors often settle once attachment bites; a payment plan recorded in the execution case, with the attachment kept in force, is often the fastest route to cash.
Where domestic enforcement and setting aside fit
An award from an arbitration seated in Bangladesh is enforced under section 44 by the court where it was made, once the sixty-day period for setting aside under section 42 has expired or a challenge has failed.[1] Our separate guides cover execution of domestic awards and the grounds and procedure for setting aside under sections 42 and 43.
For the wider framework, see arbitration law in Bangladesh and our overview of alternative dispute resolution in Bangladesh. TRW's international arbitration practice acts for award-holders and award-debtors in foreign arbitral award enforcement Bangladesh proceedings.
Frequently asked questions
Which court enforces a foreign arbitral award in Bangladesh?
The District Judge's court in Dhaka, whatever the location of the debtor or its assets. The award is enforced by execution as if it were that court's decree.[1]
Is Bangladesh a party to the New York Convention?
Yes. Bangladesh acceded on 6 May 1992 without reservations, and the Convention entered into force for it on 4 August 1992.[2]
What documents must be filed with the application?
How long do I have to apply for enforcement?
Three years from the date of the award. In February 2026 the High Court Division applied article 182 of the Limitation Act 1908 and held that delay cannot be condoned under section 5.[5]
Can a Bangladeshi court review the merits of a foreign award?
No. The High Court Division held in July 2026 that the enforcing court does not sit in appeal over the tribunal and may refuse enforcement only on a ground in section 46 that is affirmatively proved.[6]
Can a Bangladeshi court set aside a foreign award?
No. Only the courts of the seat can annul the award. A Bangladeshi court can only recognise and enforce it, or refuse to do so.[6]
What does public policy mean at the enforcement stage?
A narrow exception for fraud, corruption, denial of natural justice or violation of fundamental legal principles. The refusing court must identify the specific principle at stake.[6]
Can a state-owned entity claim sovereign immunity?
Can I freeze the debtor's assets before enforcement is decided?
Source register
Primary legal and regulatory sources
Materials checked on 20 October 2026. Confirm the current official text before relying on any provision.
- Arbitration Act 2001 (Act No. I of 2001), full text — Laws of Bangladesh
- UNCITRAL — Status of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York, 1958)
- Chambers Global Practice Guides — International Arbitration 2026: Bangladesh
- Legal 500 Country Comparative Guides — Bangladesh: International Arbitration (November 2025)
- High Court Division, Jess Smith & Sons Cotton LLC v Patriot Spinning Mills Ltd, Arbitration Appeal No. 24 of 2024 (26 February 2026)
- High Court Division, South Express Ltd v Madina Enterprise, Arbitration Appeal No. 08 of 2025 (9 July 2026)
- High Court Division, Litmond Shipping Ltd v Tiryaki Agro FZE, Civil Revision No. 3417 of 2024 (24 February 2025)
- High Court Division, NEPC Consortium Power Ltd v Bangladesh Power Development Board, Civil Revision No. 2546 of 2023 (3 December 2025)
- High Court Division, Legend World Tank Pte v Multinational Shipping Co Ltd, Arbitration Application No. 30 of 2025 (12 July 2026)
- Chambers Global Practice Guides — Investor-State Arbitration 2025: Bangladesh
- HCCH — Apostille Convention status table, with objections to the accession of Bangladesh
- High Court Division, Nautical Bulk Carriers SA v MV Prosperity, Admiralty Suit No. 20 of 2021 (2 August 2026)
- Reed Smith, June 2025 — Navigating international arbitration in Bangladesh
- Code of Civil Procedure 1908 (Part II: Execution; sections 55, 60, 64 and 82) — Laws of Bangladesh
Related TRW assistance
Move from information to a defined next step
TRW acts for award-holders and award-debtors on recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Bangladesh, from document preparation and limitation strategy to asset attachment, appeals and remittance. Explore our international arbitration practice or contact TRW to discuss your award.