scholarly journals 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

2020 ◽  
pp. 86-97
Author(s):  
Volodymyr NAHNYBIDA
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
New York ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
International Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Arbitral Award ◽  
Opposing Party ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
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.

scholarly journals Exequatur de laudos arbitrales extranjeros en España: comentario al auto del TSJ de Murcia de 12 de abril de 2019 = Exequatur of foreign arbitral awards in Spain: commentary to the decision of the High Court of Justice of Murcia of 12th April 2019

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 512
Author(s):  
María José Castellanos Ruiz
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
New York ◽  
Competent Authority ◽  
High Court ◽  
Arbitral Award ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Law ◽  
New York Convention ◽  
Art V 1

Resumen: En el Auto del TSJ de Murcia de 12 de abril de 2019 se acuerda conceder al exequatur en España de un laudo arbitral dictado en Colombia, solicitado por la parte demandante Productos Florida, S.A. Los motivos de denegación del exequatur que son alegados por la parte demandada, AMC JUICES, S.L y que son objeto de análisis son: a) Sentencia arbitral no obligatoria para las partes o que ha sido anulada o suspendida por una autoridad competente del país en que, o conforme a cuya Ley, ha sido dictada esa sentencia (art. V.1.e) Convenio de Nueva York de 1958); b) Reconocimiento o ejecución del laudo arbitral contrarios al orden público del Estado requerido (art. V.2.b) Convenio de Nueva York de 1958). En definitiva, la postura de los tribunales españoles en relación con el Convenio de Nueva York de 10 de junio de 1958 sobre el reconocimiento y ejecución de las sentencias arbitrales extranjeras, es la de favorecer el reconocimiento y ejecución de laudos arbitrales, de manera que sólo rechazan el exequatur de un laudo arbitral por motivos muy claros y evidentes.Palabras clave: laudos arbitrales extranjeros, convenios arbitrales, reconocimiento y ejecución, exequatur, Convenio de Nueva York de 1958, Ley española de Arbitraje de 2003. Abstract: In decision of the High Court of Murcia of 12th April 2019, it is agreed the exequatur in Spain of an foreign arbitral award issued in Colombia, requested by the plaintiff Productos Florida, S.A. The grounds for refusal of the exequatur that are alleged by the defendant, AMC JUICES, S.L. and that are subject to analysis are: a) The award has not yet become binding on the parties, or has been set aside or suspended by a competent authority of the country in which, or under the law of which, that award was made. (art. V.1.e) New York Convention of 1958); b) Recognition or enforcement of the foreign arbitral awards would be contrary to its public policy (art. V.2.b) New York Convention of 1958). In short, the position of the Spanish courts in relation to The New York Convention of June 10, 1958 on the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, is to favor the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, so that only they reject the exequatur of an arbitral award for very clear and obvious reasons. Keywords: foreign arbitral awards, arbitral clauses, recognition and enforcement, exequatur, New York Convention of 10 june 1958, Spanish arbitration law of 2003. 

scholarly journals Dallah: the death knell for deference?

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 ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
New York Convention

<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>

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

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Möckesch Annabelle
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
Common Denominator ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
International Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Mandatory Rules ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
New York Convention

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.

scholarly journals Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitration Awards in Kazakhstan

2018 ◽  
pp. 358-367
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
New York ◽  
General Meeting ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
New York Convention

Arbitration, as an alternative way to resolve commercial disputes, has been used in Kazakhstan for more than twenty years. Arbitration Court is governed by Civil Procedure Code, The Law On Enactments and the Regulatory Resolution. The expansion of the list of documents in the Regulatory Resolution does not comply with the requirements of the New York Convention and therefore, the purpose of our study is to clarify it. The research institute of private law of the Caspian University together with Kazakhstan International Arbitration prepared proposals for making amendments and supplements to the Law On Arbitration and the CPC at the request of the Arbitration Chamber of Kazakhstan. Most of the proposals developed by us were approved and included in the Draft Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan On Amendments and Supplements to Certain Enactments of the Republic of Kazakhstan On Enhancing Protection of Title and Arbitration after discussion at the meetings of the General Meeting members of Arbitration Chamber of Kazakhstan. It was proposed to bringing in compliance with the New York Convention some paragraphs of the Art. 255 and the Art. 504 of CPC and a series of articles in the Law on arbitration. In this article also given answers to some questions of the arbitration court regarding corporate and marriage dispute, as well as an issue of contradiction public policy.

scholarly journals Problems in Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards in Turkey

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adnan Deynekli
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
New York ◽  
Necessary Conditions ◽  
Arbitral Tribunal ◽  
Arbitral Award ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
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.

scholarly journals International Commercial Arbitration in Malaysia

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 ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
Model Law ◽  
New York Convention

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.

scholarly journals A refusal reason of recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards

2019 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 503-522
Author(s):  
Yunus Emre
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
New York ◽  
Public Order ◽  
The Public ◽  
Arbitral Award ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
New York Convention

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.

scholarly journals AN ANNULLED AWARD CANNOT BE ENFORCED UNDER THE NEW YORK CONVENTION

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 171
Author(s):  
Faizal Kurniawan
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
New York ◽  
The State ◽  
Arbitral Award ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
New York Convention ◽  
Made In

Arbitral award is final and binding. A concept of “binding” is fundamental in International arbitral award. Nevertheless, the focus commonly concerns about the annulment and/or deferment of International arbitral award so that it could not be implemented. However, the New York Convention does not govern this issue.  In addition, international arbitral awards must meet the following requirements: the award is made in the territory other than conflicting countries, and/ or it is not considered a domestic awards in the State where recognition and enforcement is sought. This is important because the enforcement proceedings between foreign and domestic awards are different. This article elaborates the principles of the recognition and enforcement of a foreign award and the grounds or criteria for refusing to enforce an award are limited to the specific defenses i.e. public policy. The party opposing enforcement bears the burden of proofin the existence of the enumerated defenses.Keywords: binding, annullment, deferment, acknowledgement and enforcement of arbitral award.

scholarly journals Dallah: the death knell for deference?

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 ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
New York Convention

<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>

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

2019 ◽  
pp. 8-16
Author(s):  
S. Kravtsov
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
International Commercial Arbitration ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
New York Convention

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document