9 Recognition and Enforcement

Model Law ◽

This chapter discusses the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards. Domestic awards are recognized and enforced under the provisions of the Arbitration Act, which are virtually the same as the provisions in the New York Convention. As per the Model Law, if an arbitration is seated in Korea it is considered a domestic arbitration. In addition, the 2016 Arbitration Act now provides that recognition or enforcement of an arbitral award can occur in far more simplified fashion, through an enforcement decision by a court, as is the case in such civil law countries as Germany and Japan. Furthermore, under the amended Article 37.1, a domestic and foreign arbitral award will be recognized as long as grounds to set it aside do not exist.

Remedies to Challenge Arbitral Awards in Pakistan

Journal of Asian Research ◽

10.22158/jar.v1n1p14 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 1 (1) ◽

pp. 14

Author(s):

Sohaib Mukhtar ◽

Shafqat Mahmood Khan Mastoi

Keyword(s):

New York ◽

Official Language ◽

High Court ◽

Arbitral Award ◽

Procedural Law ◽

Model Law ◽

New York Convention ◽

International Conventions ◽

Article 5

Available remedies to challenge arbitral awards in Pakistan are modification, remission, annulment and revocation of recognition and enforcement. Arbitration is a method through which disputing parties resolve their disputes outside the Court by avoiding technicalities of procedural law. If there is irregularity regarding process and procedure of arbitral tribunal, parties to an arbitration agreement may apply against it in the Court. Arbitrator files an arbitral award in the Court after completion of arbitral proceedings. If arbitral award is domestic and comes under ambit of Civil Court, arbitrator files arbitral award there but in case of foreign arbitral award, parties to arbitration agreement are required to file arbitral award with arbitration agreement and in case if arbitral award and arbitration agreement are not in official language of Pakistan, translation in official language is required to be submitted before High Court for implementation of arbitral award in Pakistan. Aggrieved party to arbitration agreement may challenge arbitral award before the Court for modification under section 15, for remission under section 16 and for setting aside under section 30 of the Arbitration Act 1940. Recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award may be challenged under article 5 of the New York Convention 1958. The UNCITRAL Model Law 1985 and other relevant International Conventions are not applicable in Pakistan thus aggrieved party may not avail grounds mentioned in these Statutes for modification, remission, setting aside and revocation. Pakistan is an Islamic country hence no award can be implemented in Pakistan if it is against injunctions of Islam under the light of Holy Quran and Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad ï·º which comes under ambit of public policy which is one of the grounds for revocation of recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award in Pakistan.

Dallah: the death knell for deference?

10.26686/wgtn.17142995.v1 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

◽

Anastasia Lee Fraser

Keyword(s):

New York ◽

United Kingdom ◽

Supreme Court ◽

De Novo ◽

Commercial Arbitration ◽

English Court ◽

Arbitral Award ◽

The United Kingdom ◽

This paper examines the decision of the United Kingdom Supreme Court in Dallah Real Estate and Tourism Holding Company v The Minister of Religious Affairs, Government of Pakistan, a rare case where an English court refused enforcement of an international arbitral award under the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the New York Convention). Although in Dallah the United Kingdom Supreme Court acknowledged the trend to limit reconsideration of the findings of arbitral tribunals in fact and in law, the Court considered it was bound to decide the question of validity de novo. Contrary to the tribunal, the Court held the arbitration agreement was not valid under the law to which it was subject and refused enforcement of the arbitral award. This paper analyses how the English Supreme Court decided the legal issues before it. It concludes the English court could have reached the same decision on a more convincing basis. Even where the issue is initial consent, holding the court at the place of enforcement is always bound to decide a matter de novo neither serves the objectives of international commercial arbitration nor is necessary to promote the fundamental integrity of arbitral proceedings.

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

International Arbitration: Law and Practice in Brazil ◽

10.1093/law/9780198840114.003.0002 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Sester Peter

Keyword(s):

New York ◽

International Arbitration ◽

Commercial Arbitration ◽

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.

The Singapore Convention on Mediation—A Brighter Future for Asian Dispute Resolution

Asian Journal of International Law ◽

10.1017/s2044251318000309 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (2) ◽

pp. 195-205 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Eunice CHUA

Keyword(s):

New York ◽

Dispute Resolution ◽

Critical Analysis ◽

Trade Law ◽

International Trade Law ◽

Settlement Agreements ◽

Model Law ◽

New York Convention ◽

Brighter Future

AbstractOn 26 June 2018, the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law [UNCITRAL] approved, largely without modification, the final drafts of the Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation (the Singapore Convention) and amendments to the Model Law on International Commercial Mediation prepared by Working Group II. These instruments aim to promote the enforceability of international commercial settlement agreements reached through mediation in the same way that the New York Convention facilitates the recognition and enforcement of international arbitration awards. This paper provides a critical analysis of the Singapore Convention, and some commentary from an Asian perspective.

10 Setting Aside an Arbitral Award

10.1093/law/9780198755432.003.0010 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Kim Joongi

Keyword(s):

Public Policy ◽

New York ◽

Arbitral Award ◽

Model Law ◽

This chapter considers the grounds for setting aside an arbitral award. It looks at cases where set-asides have occurred—due to invalid agreements, an excess of jurisdiction, the formation of a tribunal, and public policy arguments. The Arbitration Act’s provisions concerning set-aside closely follow the Model Law and New York Convention. The chapter, however, also discusses other pre-Model Law grounds for a set-aside, such as when ‘a decision has been omitted regarding an important matter that would affect the judgment’. Moreover, the chapter explores the effects of a set-aside, before closing with some arguments raised by leading arbitration scholars.

Settlement of Disputes by Way of Arbitration in Pakistan

World Journal of Social Science Research ◽

10.22158/wjssr.v3n4p518 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 3 (4) ◽

pp. 518

Author(s):

Sohaib Mukhtar

Keyword(s):

New York ◽

Rural Areas ◽

Poor People ◽

Procedural Law ◽

Model Law ◽

New York Convention ◽

Alternate Dispute Resolution ◽

Settlement Of Disputes ◽

International Conventions

Arbitration is a method, through which, parties resolve their disputes; outside the court of law; by avoiding all types of technicalities of procedural law. It is one of the modes of Alternate Dispute Resolution. The Arbitration Act 1940 is the only statute in Pakistan, which deals with all types of arbitration processes in Pakistan, but it does not deal with the recognition and enforcement process of International Arbitral Awards in Pakistan. The New York Convention 1958 is enforced in Pakistan, through the Recognition and Enforcement Act 2011 and it deals with the recognition and enforcement process of International Arbitral Awards in Pakistan. The problem in Pakistan is that the majority arbitration processes are not conducted, in accordance with the provisions of the prescribed laws of arbitration, they are usually conducted, in accordance with the customs and usages of the society, which are not prescribed in the current Arbitration Act 1940. There are private Jirga and Punchayat systems; in rural areas; throughout Pakistan, to resolve disputes of the poor people of the locality and the decision of that proceeding usually are not submitted in the court of law, for the implementation, which is the requirement under the Arbitration Act 1940, for the smooth implementation of the decision; through the executive wing of the state. Many countries of the world have amended their arbitration laws, as per the customs and usages of the society and under the light of the relevant International Conventions and Treaties. Similarly, in Pakistan, the Arbitration Act 1940 needs a lot of changes, as per the customs and usages of the society, relevant principles laid down in the Holy Quran and Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad and in accordance with the related International Conventions and Treaties. The UNCITRAL Model Law 1985 is not applicable in Pakistan, thus it is also a requirement and need of the time to be implemented in Pakistan, through the act of the Parliament.

Problems in Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards in Turkey

International Conference on Eurasian Economies 2013 ◽

10.36880/c04.00806 ◽

2013 ◽

Author(s):

Adnan Deynekli

Keyword(s):

Public Policy ◽

New York ◽

Necessary Conditions ◽

Arbitral Tribunal ◽

Arbitral Award ◽

New York Convention ◽

Domestic Law

If the arbitral award which requested to recognition and enforcement given in the country is a party to New York Convention dated 1958, primarily the provisions of this Convention shall be applied. The recognition and enforcement of domestic law and regulations duly implemented. Whether judgment fees should be fixed or proportional are discussion. The demand for recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral tribunal shall not review the basis of the decision of the referee. The necessary conditions for enforcement of foreign arbitral decisions and must be moved. The existence of the arbitration agreement against the enforcement of the arbitration requested by referee assignments, and to be aware of the dispute to arbitration and enforcement required to be favorable verdict must not be contrary to public policy.

The Influence of the Law of the Country of the Place of Enforcement of the Arbitral Award on the Settlement of Disputes in the International Commercial Arbitration

University Scientific Notes ◽

10.37491/unz.73.8 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 86-97

Author(s):

Volodymyr NAHNYBIDA

Keyword(s):

Public Policy ◽

New York ◽

Commercial Arbitration ◽

International Commercial Arbitration ◽

Arbitral Award ◽

Opposing Party ◽

The Law ◽

New York Convention ◽

The Impact

The article examines the key aspects of the impact of the law of the place of enforcement of the arbitral award on arbitration and directly on the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards, given the study of doctrinal positions, regulations and relevant case law. It was found out that the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1958 refers to the procedural rules of the country of enforcement to settle matters inherent to the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards not governed by the Convention, establishing only basic and fairly simple formal requirements for the said procedure, which is one of the strong characteristics of the conventional regime of recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards. In light of this, it is concluded that such an approach is moderate and takes into account the impossibility and lack of practical necessity of unification at the international treaty level of procedural features of recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards, establishing only basic principles and requirements. It is substantiated that there are two components of the law of the place of enforcement of the arbitral award, which regulate the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards within the relevant jurisdiction, namely substantive and procedural, which, however, are contained in single legal acts — mostly national arbitration laws. The author emphasizes the crucial role of the law of the place of enforcement of the arbitral award in the material and procedural aspects for the procedure of recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards within the relevant jurisdiction. It is concluded that the unification of material grounds for refusal of recognition and enforcement (in particular, non-arbitrability of the subject matter of the dispute and contradiction of the award to public policy as grounds that can be raised by the competent judicial authority at the place of enforcement ex officio, regardless of reference to them by opposing party), as well as the consolidation of basic procedural requirements and principles is carried out by the New York Convention of 1958, which leaves to the discretion of the national legislature, on the one hand, the settlement of minor aspects of the procedure, but, on the other hand, recognizes its full discretion in determining the limits of objective arbitrability, the content and specific filling of the category of international public policy applicable in the relevant jurisdiction. Keywords: arbitral award, international commercial arbitration, applicable law, arbitration process, public policy.

International Commercial Arbitration in Malaysia

Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities ◽

10.47836/pjssh.29.s2.10 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 29 (S2) ◽

Author(s):

Iyllyana Che Rosli

Keyword(s):

New York ◽

Best Practice ◽

International Treaties ◽

Commercial Arbitration ◽

International Commercial Arbitration ◽

Cross Border ◽

Before And After ◽

Model Law ◽

In the recent two decades, the wave of globalisation has hit the Malaysian market. It hence contributes to the popularity of arbitration as the means to settle cross border commercial disputes. The existing literature concerned with Malaysia suggests that the recent trend in Malaysia is that arbitration has become the dominant choice of dispute resolution forum. Using qualitative and doctrinal methods, this paper seeks to analyse the regulatory framework for international commercial arbitration in Malaysia, before and after Malaysia’s accession to the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, 1958 (hereinafter, NYC 1958). The NYC 1958 is one of the most successful international treaties with 161 contracting States. The NYC 1958 aims to promote uniform practical procedures for the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in its contracting States, irrespective seat of the awards. In doing so, the paper examines two significant periods of arbitration laws in Malaysia: pre and post-accession to the NYC 1958. The paper concludes that Malaysia no longer follows English arbitration legislation and instead follows international best practice by adopting the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (hereinafter, UML) as the basis of its modern legislation, the Arbitration Act 2005. Malaysian courts are also seen to adopt a positive ‘pro-enforcement’ attitude in the application to recognise and enforce foreign arbitral awards, in promoting maximum enforcement of awards as promoted by the NYC 1958 and the UML.

A refusal reason of recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards

Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Splitu ◽

10.31141/zrpfs.2019.56.132.503 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 56 (2) ◽

pp. 503-522

Author(s):

Yunus Emre

Keyword(s):

Public Policy ◽

New York ◽

Public Order ◽

The Public ◽

Arbitral Award ◽

Public policy is one of the most debated concepts in enforcement cases of foreign arbitral award as a sensitive term. It is the most frequent challenging reason of foreign arbitral awards in New York Convention, and therefore it may be used as a defense tool against foreign arbitral awards in enforcement cases before courts. Although public policy is not only refusal reason in New York Convention, other refusal reasons covered by New York Convention may be interpreted as public policy violations before courts. Therefore, relationship between public order and other refusal reasons is key point of this research. Secondly, one important well-known fact should be emphasized regarding public policy. Each country has its own public policy concept and criteria differently from other countries. Although one foreign arbitral award may be enforced in a country as it is in accordance with the public order of country of enforcement, it may be refused in a different country because of public policy reason. Therefore, public policy concept shall be discussed in different aspects in this study.