This article examines the “game-changing” approach of the French Court of Cassation (“CC”) in the recent Valeri Belokon v Kyrgyz Republic regarding the scope of judicial review of arbitral awards in cases involving corruption. We consider below the significantly different French courts’ stance regarding judicial review prior to the Belokon decision. We then turn to the reasoning of the CC in Belokon. In comparison with the prior practice, we then review the approach of the French CC in subsequent decisions following Belokon. Lastly, we address the potential implications of Belokon for French jurisprudence and France as the chosen seat of arbitration.