Jurisdiction and admissibility: a case study

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 373-413
Author(s):  
Tolu O Obamuroh
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Judicial Intervention ◽  
Model Law ◽  
New York Convention

Abstract Arbitrators cannot decide cases if they do not have jurisdiction. For this reason, a challenge to jurisdiction may prompt judicial intervention. Most national courts, however, limit their intervention to question of jurisdiction and do not interfere in the arbitral process if the objection is merely one of admissibility. The distinction between jurisdiction and admissibility is a valuable tool for differentiating when judicial intervention is appropriate and when it is not. The problem is that some national courts generally conflate the concept of jurisdiction, which may properly be the basis for such intervention, with admissibility issues, which should be referred to the tribunal to decide. As a case study, this article focuses on the conflation by Nigerian courts leading to an overly expansive allocation of authority to courts to make initial rulings, which in turn is abused by parties and undermines the efficiency of arbitration in Nigeria. To address the problem, this article proposes that Nigerian courts adopt the distinction between jurisdictional and admissibility objections in international arbitration. This distinction, while not perfect, can promote efficacy in arbitration seated in Nigeria. Adopting the distinction between admissibility and jurisdiction will enable Nigerian courts to exercise greater restraint in cases that do not go to the root of courts’ authority and promote outcomes that are more coherent and more consistent with their obligations under the New York Convention and Model Law.

Part 1 Fundaments of Arbitration in Brazil, 2 Comments of the Brazilian Arbitration Law

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sester Peter
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
Model Law ◽  
New York Convention ◽  
Definition Of

This chapter examines the Brazilian Arbitration Law (BAL) of 1996. The BAL is a standalone act encompassing roughly 40 articles. It is divided into eight chapters and is applicable to both domestic and international arbitration, except for Chapter VI (The Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Awards), which is modelled on the New York Convention (NYC). Hence, the BAL legislator adopted a monistic approach. Consequently, the BAL contains no definition of domestic or international arbitration, but only defines the term foreign award. According to article 34, sole paragraph BAL, an award is considered a foreign award if it was rendered outside the territory of Brazil. The present translation of the BAL builds on the terminology of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Commercial Arbitration and the NYC because both documents inspired the authors of the BAL and are cornerstones of international arbitration. This chapter of the book then provides comments on the BAL article by article.

Understanding Public Policy as an Exception to the Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards

2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 316-350
Author(s):  
Wasiq Abass Dar
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
New York ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Or Practice ◽  
Wide Definition ◽  
Model Law ◽  
New York Convention ◽  
Definition Of

The paper, as the title suggests, aims at understanding and exploring the doctrine of public policy as a ground for refusing enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. Public Policy is one such ground provided in the New York Convention as well as in the uncitral Model Law, which is most often invoked in the national courts to challenge or refuse the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. What makes it more complicated is the lack of common world-wide definition of public policy or practice on its application, as the same varies from State to State. The traces of ambiguity, subjectivity (at the hands of the courts in terms of interpretation of the concept), and unpredictability associated with the concept of public policy have at times significantly thwarted the effectiveness and efficiency of international commercial arbitration. This paper attempts to understand and explore the enigma of public policy as an exception to the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. Apart from revisiting various scholarly works on this issue, interpretation of this concept by various judicial institutions across the globe (with special focus on India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka) has been attempted, followed by a comparative analysis, to analyse its application on the ground. This paper argues and suggests that a more desirable method of interpreting public policy, i.e. narrow interpretation, is the need of the hour, keeping in consideration the growing demands of international trade and commerce.

Practitioner's Handbook on International Commercial Arbitration

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
General Introduction ◽  
Comprehensive Overview ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Model Law ◽  
New York Convention

This book provides reports on the arbitration systems and laws of thirteen countries in addition to commentaries on the arbitration rules of the International Criminal Court (ICC), the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR), the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA), and UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules as well as on the UNCITRAL Model Law and the New York Convention. This comprehensive overview of the key arbitral jurisdictions and the most important arbitral rules and conventions makes it a unique and indispensable work that belongs on the desk of each practitioner. The book combines a practical approach with in-depth legal research and analyses of important national and international case law. This new edition is written to meet the needs of both the non-specialist lawyer requiring quick and useful information on a particular legal system or set of rules or who is interested in a concise general introduction into the law of international arbitration, and the experienced arbitration practitioner looking for well-founded information on a particular issue.

10 Challenge of Arbitral Awards

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Blackaby Nigel ◽  
Partasides Constantine ◽  
Redfern Alan ◽  
Hunter Martin
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Model Law ◽  
New York Convention

This chapter discusses the challenge or appeal of arbitral awards by the losing party of arbitration. Under the New York Convention and the UNICTRAL Model Law, the purpose of challenging an award is to have the court declare all, or part, of the award null and void. If an award is set aside or annulled by the relevant court, it will usually be treated as invalid and accordingly unenforceable not only by the courts of the seat of arbitration, but also by national courts elsewhere. The chapter describes the various methods of challenge: ‘internal’ challenge; the correction and interpretation of awards; the issuance of additional awards; and the remission of awards. If the challenge is successful, the court may decide to confirm the award, refer it back to the arbitrary tribunal, vary the award, or set it aside in whole or in part.

Part III International Arbitration Agreements: Issues and Perspectives, 6 Some Reflections on the Making of International Arbitration Agreements for the Resolution of Commercial Disputes

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saville Lord
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
International Dispute ◽  
Model Law ◽  
New York Convention ◽  
Legal Procedures ◽  
Commercial Disputes

This chapter presents some thoughts on international arbitration. It begins with brief descriptions of the New York Convention and the UNCITRAL Model Law, which serve as the foundations of international dispute resolution. It then discusses arbitration agreements, the role of institutions, the role of law, and the disadvantages of arbitration. It argues that international commercial arbitration has become much more like that of the London Commercial Court; more often than not lawyers are called in from the outset. Pleadings, discovery, and the like are commonplace. The arbitral process has also become more expensive, notwithstanding substantial efforts by arbitral institutions and others to limit costs. It further suggests that where the tribunal considers that the dispute can be dealt with fairly and more cheaply without the full panoply of such legal procedures as the parties’ lawyers propose, that they make certain that the parties themselves, not just their lawyers, are made aware of the tribunal’s view.

An Analysis of Jordanian Jurisdiction as a Seat for International Arbitration

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Zaid M. Aladwan ◽  
Mutaz M. Aladwan
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
The State ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Arbitration Procedure ◽  
Model Law ◽  
New York Convention

Abstract Arbitration is the best method to resolve a dispute, due to the flexibility in its mechanism and issuing of a final judgment, known as an ‘award’. The winning party usually seeks to apply that award in the state where the assets of the losing party exist. In this regard, the New York Convention 1958 guarantees that the award is enforceable in the state where the winning party sought to apply. Jordan is party to the Convention; it has regulated its own arbitration law and has adopted the UNCITRAL Model Law 1985. However, not all provisions were adopted where specific provisions in Jordanian law relating to certain matters differed from the Model Law provisions. These differences may positively or adversely affect the arbitration procedure in Jordan.

scholarly journals NATIONAL COURT INTERVENTION IN ARBITRATION AS AN INVESTMENT TREATY CLAIM

2011 ◽  
Vol 60 (2) ◽  
pp. 485-498 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Garnett
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
National Court ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
International Commercial Arbitration ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Model Law ◽  
Court Intervention ◽  
New York Convention

International commercial arbitration has long been a popular method for resolving cross-border business disputes. The opportunity for parties to choose their adjudicators and the dispute resolution procedure, the scope for privacy and the greater capacity for enforcement of awards compared to court judgments are all important reasons that parties prefer international arbitration over litigation. Reinforcing this trend in favour of international commercial arbitration has been a general consensus among national courts and legislatures that support, rather than interference, should be provided to the arbitral process. Such a philosophy is apparent, for example, in the requirements in the widely adopted New York Convention for States to recognize and enforce both foreign arbitration agreements and awards, and in international instruments such as the 1985 UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, which authorize national courts to assist, rather than intervene, in the conduct of arbitrations within their borders. Moreover, international commercial arbitration has proven to be sufficiently flexible as a dispute resolution method to be used both in disputes between private parties, and between private and State entities.

scholarly journals Review of arbitral awards for breach of natural justice: an internationalist approach

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Daniel Brady
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Natural Justice ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
Model Law ◽  
New York Convention ◽  
Dispute Resolution Mechanism

<p>While international commercial arbitration is widely regarded as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism to litigation in national courts, those courts are frequently engaged in the review arbitral awards in the context of annulment as well as recognition and enforcement. A key purpose of this review is to ensure that the arbitral procedure is consistent with the fundamental principles of natural justice. These principles find their origin in the general principles of law common to civilised nations, and their application is mandated by both the New York Convention and the UNCITRAL Model Law. This paper argues that the content of these principles should be ‘internationalised’. That is, it is both appropriate and desirable that domestic courts, irrespective of the jurisdiction in which they happen to be sitting, apply the basic rules of natural justice in uniform way. It is submitted that this would not only result in a consistent and therefore reliable recognition and enforcement regime, but would also contribute to the success and increased adoption of international arbitration as a key alternative dispute resolution mechanism.</p>

Part III Where to Arbitrate? Distinctive Features of Maritime Arbitral Seats, 12 Common Types of Shipping Arbitration: In Singapore and London

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chan Leng Sun
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
Institutional Rules ◽  
Institutional Services ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
Model Law ◽  
New York Convention

This chapter reflects on developments in maritime arbitration in Singapore, highlighting its distinctive features via a comparison with London, the shipping world’s preferred arbitration centre. In Singapore, the Arbitration Act (Cap 10, 2002 Rev Ed) governs domestic arbitration whereas the International Arbitration Act (Cap 143A, 2002 Rev Ed) (the ‘IAA’) governs international arbitration. The IAA gives the force of law to the UNCITRAL Model Law 1985 and the New York Convention on the Reciprocal Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. Singapore offers the possibility to arbitrate under the institutional rules of either the Singapore Chamber of Maritime Arbitration (SCMA) or the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC). The SIAC provides institutional services, including the appointment of arbitrators. The SCMA was in recent years taken outside the structure of the SIAC to provide a service more comparable to that provided by the London Maritime Arbitrators Association (LMAA).

Enforcement

2020 ◽  
pp. 185-215
Author(s):  
Andrea K. Bjorklund
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Fair Play ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Party Autonomy ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
Procedural Safeguards ◽  
New York Convention

This chapter addresses enforcement in international arbitration. The ready enforceability of arbitral awards is the single strongest component of the architecture that undergirds international arbitration. Two conventions are the primary mechanisms ensuring that enforceability: the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, colloquially known as the New York Convention; and the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States, colloquially referred to as the ICSID Convention or the Washington Convention. The regime for enforcement of arbitral awards is based on a structure that prioritizes enforcement so long as awards are rendered pursuant to certain largely procedural safeguards. This approach is an attempt to balance the principle of party autonomy with concern on the part of national courts that they not be co-opted into enforcing awards not consistent with at least rudimentary principles of fair play. Judgment debtors can thus resist enforcement should the arbitration have failed to comport with fundamental notions of due process. In the case of the New York Convention, two other grounds for resisting enforcement have to do with policy considerations in the enforcing state.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document