Bridging the Enforcement Gap in International Trade: Participation in the New York Convention on Arbitration

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Olabisi
2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 145
Author(s):  
Shila Taheri ◽  
Hassan Soleimani

The present study is an attempt to analyze the executive guaranty of arbitration at international law within internal Iranian law and the international law. The present research findings show that within internal law in case the arbitration verdict is not carried out voluntarily then its obligatory administration is under the support of law and has legal executive guaranty. But arbitration privilege at administration stage is not limited to the fact that any arbitration verdict is to be performed without any questioning but a significant aspect of this privilege is to prevent the administration of a verdict which is altered or creased and openly against the facts or the law. In international law the international commerce chamber arbitration system is the most important international trade arbitration system in contemporary period and has always been the influential forerunner in international arbitration and has had a significant role in the development and expansion of arbitration method of settling international trade disputes. Both the chamber arbitration rules and arbitration verdicts which are issued under the chamber arbitration framework are among the most important legal resources in terms of international arbitration and are considered as the constructive and formative factors of international arbitration procedure. It should be mentioned that commerce chamber arbitration organization lacks the executive tools to execute the arbitration verdicts. But in spite of that on the basis of arbitration rules article 35 the arbitration authority and the chamber arbitration court makes attempts to execute the verdict and the purpose is mostly the official measures rather than judicial or administrative. Principally, the execution of arbitration verdicts depend on state rules and regulations where from the identification and administration of verdict is requested.


2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 81
Author(s):  
Sormeh Bouzarjomehri ◽  
Eisa Amini

<p>The New York Convention is considered as the main pillar of the international arbitration and the most effective transnational legal instrument in international trade. But the most important challenge that the Convention is facing is a uniform application by the Member States. Article V of the Convention containing several grounds for refusal of recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards, could be deemed as an obstacle to achieve this goal. The most controversial ground is the public policy that affects the uniform application of the Convention and the predictability of the arbitration process. Then the lack of a definition for public policy has opened the door for different interpretations in different countries.</p><p>The questions that the paper at hand deals with are the following: What are the consequences for the lack of a definition for the public policy ground in the New York Convention? Is it necessary to revise the New York Convention to address this issue?</p>In order to answer these questions, the paper at hand will present some court decisions in order to elaborate the mentioned challenge and find an appropriate solution.


2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-94
Author(s):  
Komang Sukaniasa

Diplomatic officials are state representatives in developing diplomatic relations with other countries where it is accredited. Diplomatic officials have the rights of immunity and privileges granted by the sending country. Besides enjoying these rights, diplomatic officials also have obligations. As a diplomatic official from North Korea, Son Young Nam is obliged to obey the rules contained in the 1961 Vienna Convention, the 1969 New York Convention, and to respect the national law of the country of Bangladesh which is the country where he was accredited. Son Young Nam's smuggling of gold into Bangladesh was a form of abuse of diplomatic immunity. The act violated Articles 27 and 41 (1) of the 1961 Vienna Convention and Article 25b of The Special Power Act of Bangladesh. Although they have the right to immunity, these rights are not absolute. Immune rights can be breached in the event of gross violations committed by diplomatic officials.


2021 ◽  
pp. 205556362110228
Author(s):  
Konstantina Kalaitsoglou

Despite its importance, the arbitral award was left undefined by the New York Convention and most other major international arbitration laws. This has inevitably led to varying opinions regarding its nature and confusion regarding the thresholds that differentiate arbitral awards from other tribunal decisions. Partly in response to the above, there has been discussion to initiate the revising process of the Convention. Responses have been divided. In this paper, the author finds that revision will not bring the desired results, while the Convention itself has equipped international arbitration practice with tools to overcome obscure legal concepts such as the arbitral award.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document