scholarly journals The Status of the Foreign Arbitral Award According to the Albanian Legislation Provisions in Light of the New York Convention: Formal and Substantial Issues

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Artan Spahiu ◽  
Arber Gjeta
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Arbitral Award ◽  
The Status ◽  
New York Convention

scholarly journals Exploring the concept of arbitral awards under the New York Convention

2021 ◽  
pp. 205556362110228
Author(s):  
Konstantina Kalaitsoglou
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Arbitral Award ◽  
New York Convention ◽  
Legal Concepts

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.

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>

Foreign Arbitral Awards and Foreign Judgments Based upon Such Awards

2018 ◽  
pp. 126-143
Author(s):  
V.C. Govindaraj
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Domestic Court ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Arbitral Award ◽  
Supreme Court Of India ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
New York Convention

The New York Convention on foreign arbitration, by Article V (1) (e) lays down a procedural norm that an arbitral award, duly rendered, attains finality if, and only if, a domestic court endorses it. This procedural norm was endorsed by the Supreme Court of India in two leading cases. The ratio that the Supreme Court employed in the above-mentioned cases is in accordance with Section 17 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940. Such an endorsement by a local court of the forum that was required under Article V (1) (e) of the New York Convention was done away with by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 under Section 35. The forum for the conduct of arbitration in the country of the applicable law also is not indispensable; and it is for the court exercising jurisdiction to determine, on the basis of balance of convenience, the place for the conduct of arbitration, taking into consideration the local status of the parties, such as that one of the parties cannot afford to go to the country of the applicable law, coupled with the availability of evidence, oral and documentary, at the place where the court is exercising jurisdiction.

10 Setting Aside an Arbitral Award

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim Joongi
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
New York ◽  
Arbitral Award ◽  
Model Law ◽  
New York Convention

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.

Arbitral Jurisdiction

2020 ◽  
pp. 69-102
Author(s):  
Alex Mills
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Arbitral Tribunal ◽  
Arbitral Award ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Basic Source ◽  
New York Convention

This chapter examines the concept and source of arbitral jurisdiction. In the context of arbitration, the term ‘jurisdiction’ typically refers to the ‘power’ or ‘authority’ of the arbitral tribunal to decide a dispute. A decision about whether a tribunal has jurisdiction will frequently be made by the tribunal itself, but that decision is not and cannot be a source of its jurisdiction, and cannot be a definitive determination of that jurisdiction, because the authority of that decision depends on the very question under review. A degree of deference may be given to the tribunal’s determination of these questions by national courts, but self-evidently a tribunal may not confer authority on itself. Thus, the ‘power’ of a tribunal comes more indirectly from two sources. First, the cooperation of national courts, which may readily recognize and enforce arbitral awards and may also act in support of arbitration in various other ways. Second, the potential reputational consequences of non-compliance with an arbitral award, which may lead a party to comply with it voluntarily. The legal framework for arbitration applied by most national courts is set out in the New York Convention 1958, and this remains a key basic source of the standards which are applied to determine when an arbitral tribunal is considered to have jurisdiction.

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 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.

Constitutionality of Article VII of the New York Convention of 1958 under Egyptian and Jordanian Law

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 501-516
Author(s):  
Lafi Daradkeh
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Arbitral Award ◽  
New York Convention

Abstract This article examines the constitutionality of Article VII of the 1958 New York Convention (NY Convention) under Egyptian and Jordanian law. Under Article VII, which provides for the application of the more-favourable-right provision, the winning party in an arbitration can rely on any regime provided by the local legal system to recognize and enforce the arbitral award. In doing so, the winning party can bypass provisions under which the losing party can resist enforcement. This article examines whether Article VII constitutionally provides modes of enforcement by which the winning party can enforce a legal arbitral award as well as providing grounds of refusal by which the losing party can resist enforcement of illegal awards. As such, this article examines the constitutionality of Article VII, and asks whether it balances the interests of the winning party and the losing party under constitutional law in Egypt and Jordan.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document