231
•
the judgment does not conflict with a prior Egyptian judgment in the same matter and is not contrary to public
policy in Egypt.
Egyptian courts are competent to hear disputes raised against Egyptians whether or not resident in Egypt which may
result in the rejection of the request of exequatur of a non-Egyptian judgment rendered against the Issuer. Further, since
a review of whether the judgment conflicts with Egyptian public policy is a matter for Egyptian courts to decide, foreign
court judgments would not be enforceable without being re-examined on the merits. The only exception is where an
international treaty providing for the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil cases exists between Egypt and
the country where the judgment is rendered. No such treaty exists between the US and Egypt for the reciprocal
enforcement of foreign court judgments.
Further, the Guarantors and the Issuer have appointed CT Corporation as their agent for service in New York of process
in any suit, action or proceeding with respect to the Notes. However, such appointment may not be respected by the
courts of Egypt because article 74 of the Egyptian civil procedures law requires each of the parties to any dispute to
have an elected domicile in Egypt in respect of the procedures taking place before the courts of Egypt.
