Part 2 Determining the Applicable Attorney–Client Privilege Standard, 8 Applicable Privilege Standard in International Commercial Arbitration

Mandatory Rules ◽

This chapter contains an analysis of the most appropriate way to determine the applicable attorney–client privilege standard in international commercial arbitration. To this end, this chapter deals with the characterization of privilege as substantive or procedural, the legal framework for attorney–client privilege in international commercial arbitration, international mandatory rules of law, and the enforcement regime under the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1958. Against this background, the chapter includes an analysis of the possible approaches to determining the privilege standard. These include the application of general principles of law, the application of a single national law determined through a choice-of-law approach such as the closest connection test, the cumulative application of several national laws, and the creation of an autonomous standard defining the scope of attorney–client privilege. Lastly, the chapter examines whether corrective measures, such as the lowest common denominator approach or the most protective rule, are needed to ensure equal treatment of the parties and fairness of the proceedings. This chapter concludes with key findings on how to determine the applicable attorney–client privilege standard in international commercial arbitration.

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 ◽

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 ◽

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.

THE APPEAL OF INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION AWARDS AS A FORM OF JUDICAL CONTROL BY NATIONAL COURTS

Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Legal Studies ◽

10.17721/1728-2195/2019/3.110-2 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 8-16

Author(s):

S. Kravtsov

Keyword(s):

New York ◽

Dispute Settlement ◽

Legal Protection ◽

European Convention ◽

Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽

Commercial Arbitration ◽

National Courts ◽

The appeal of the international commercial arbitration awards is a major issue in the dispute settlement mechanism for arbitration governed by multilateral conventions, bilateral treaties and national laws, as well as by the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1958. Notwithstanding the importance of the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1958, it restricts to a certain extent the scope of legal protection of arbitral awards, as it leaves national courts to challenge them by the way of possible annulment, and national courts when considering petitions for annulment decisions are vested in the power to revoke such decisions. In this respect, the resolution of these issues may raise the issue of the correlation between the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 and domestic legislation of the countries in which the relevant decision may be challenged. The specific of the international commercial arbitration decision is that it cannot be appealed to any higher court. However, the absence of any form of control over the arbitral award could lead to the enforcement of such decisions, which, if rendered within the judicial system, would be overturned or modified by a higher court. Therefore, there is an institution for challenging arbitral awards in national courts. Due to the fact that the arbitration award is a form of control by national courts, the regulation of this institution is defined in the legislation of each individual country, and at the international legal level only certain aspects are regulated. These are the European Convention of 1961 and the New York Convention of 1958.

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 ◽

<p>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.</p>

§ 2 . International Commercial Arbitration: The New York Convention

10.5771/9783845259192-46 ◽

2015 ◽

pp. 46-158

Keyword(s):

New York ◽

Commercial Arbitration ◽

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.