Top

Published in:

2021 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

6. Conclusion and Observations

Authors : Bruno Zeller, Gautam Mohanty, Sai Ramani Garimella

Published in: Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards and the Public Policy Exception

Publisher: Springer Singapore

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

The concluding chapter draws attention to the primordial issues addressed in the book in relation to the enforcement and recognition of foreign arbitral awards.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

previous chapter The Law on the Public Policy Exception in International Arbitration—State Practice in South Asia

See, The Hong Kong Trade and Development Council, ‘Belt and Road: Country Profile’. http://beltandroad.hktdc.com/en/country-profiles, accessed 27/08/2020.

Lim Tai Wei [1].

See, Sooksripaisarnkit and Garimella [2].

ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area (AANZFTA), 2010, https://aanzfta.asean.org/general-review, accessed 17/11/2020.

Indonesia-Australia Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement, 2020, https://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/in-force/iacepa/Pages/indonesia-australia-comprehensive-economic-partnership-agreement, accessed 17/11/2020.

UNCITRAL, UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, 1976, https://uncitral.un.org/en/texts/arbitration/contractualtexts/arbitration, accessed 01/02/2021.

UNCITAL, Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, 1985, http://www.uncitral.org/uncitral/en/uncitral_texts/arbitration/1985Model_arbitration_status.html, accessed 01/02/2021.

F. Liebelt, ‘The Courts’ Discretion under UNCITRAL Articles 34 and 36/, LLM Research Paper, Victoria University of Wellington, 2. http://researcharchive.vuw.ac.nz/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10063/3248/thesis.pdf?sequence=2.

Carbone [3].

Yearbook of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, 1981, Volume XII, ‘Report of the Secretary-General: possible features of a model law on international commercial arbitration, A/CN.9/207’, [107] https://undocs.org/pdf?symbol=en/A/CN.9/207, accessed 20/10/2020. (“Yearbook of the UNCITRAL”), 924.

'UNCITRAL Model Law, Chapter VII, Article 34 [Application for setting aside as exclusive recourse against arbitral award]', in Holtzmann and Neuhaus [4].

See, generally, United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), ‘Summary records for meetings on the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, 329th Meeting’. (“Summary Records-329^th Meeting”) https://uncitral.un.org/sites/uncitral.un.org/files/media-documents/uncitral/en/329meeting-e.pdf, accessed 08/08/2020, [69].

Codest Engineering v OOO Grupa Most (Presidium of the Supreme Arbitrazh Court of the Russian Federation 2005), in Yearbook Commercial Arbitration XXXIII (2008) (Russia no. 17), 666–672.

Corporación Mexicana De Mantenimiento Integral, S. De R.L. De C.V., v. PEP–Exploración Y Producción, 823 F 3d 92 (2^nd Cir, 2016).

Ibid., [1].

See, Yukos Capital s.a.r.l. (Luxembourg) v. OAO Rosneft (Russian Federation) (Court of Appeal 2009), in Yearbook Commercial Arbitration XXXIV (Netherlands no. 31), 703–714. See also Northern River Shipping Lines v. Kompas Overseas Inc. (District Court 2010), in Yearbook Commercial Arbitration XXXVI (Netherlands no. 36) and Nikolai Viktorovich Maximov v OJSC Novolopetsky Metallurgickesky Kombinat (District Court 2011), in Yearbook Commercial Arbitration XXXVII (Netherlands no. 41), 274–276.

Corporación Mexicana De Mantenimiento Integral, supra 14.

Ibid., 107.

Richardson v Mellish (1824) 130 E.R. 294.

Netherland v Sweden. http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?sum=145&code=nls&p1=3&p2=3&case=33&k=37&p3=5.

EEG (Shanghai) Solar Science & Technology Co., Ltd. v LUMOS LLC n/k/a/ LUMOS Solar LLC, the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Only the Westlaw citation is currently available. United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit. 2016 WL 3909579. [3]–[5].

Ibid.

Hanotiau and Caprasse [5].

OECD Hearings—Arbitration and Competition 2010 http://www.oecd.org/competition/abuse/49294392.pdf.

Wolff [6].

Mayer and Sheppard [7].

Pupuke Service Stations Ltd v Caltex Oil (NZ Ltd. [2003] 3 NZLR 338 (PC).

Ibid., 338–339.

Chen [8].

Hebei Import and Export Corp v Polytec Engeneering Co Ltd. [1999] 2 HKC 205.

Ibid., 215.

Emerald Grain Australia Pty Ltd v. Agrocorp International Pte Ltd [2014] FCA 414.

Parsons and Whitemore Overseas Co. v. Societe Generale de L’Industrie du Papier 508 F. 2d 969 (2^nd Cir. 1974). See, generally, Greenberg et al. [9]; see, generally, Mattli [10].

See, generally, Khambata [11].

Central Inland Water Transport Corporation & another v Brojo Nath Ganguly & another (1986) 3 SCC 156.

Ibid., 213.

Renusagar Power Plant Co. v General Electric Corporation (1994) Supp (1) SCC 644.

Bharat Aluminium Company v Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services, Inc. Civil Appeal No. 7019 of 2005. Decision of the Indian Supreme Court dated 06/09/2012.

Shri Lal Mahal v Progetto Grano Spa Civil Appeal No. 5085 of 2013.

National Agricultural Co-operative Marketing Federation of India v Alimenta SA 2020 SCC Online SC 381. The award related to a contract for shipment of certain commodities in which there was a partial performance by the Appellant. Upon denial of the permission by the Government of India for carrying forward the supply to the following year, the Appellant failed to supply the goods. Consequently, the Respondent initiated arbitration at the FOFSA, London, in 1981. The 1989 award in favour of the Respondent granted damages to them, and the same was applied for enforcement in India under the Foreign Awards Act, 1993. The Delhi High Court heard the Appellant twice but turned down their appeal, hence the appeal before the Supreme Court.

AA 2001, Section 45.

Uzbekistan Airways and another v Air Spain Ltd [2005] 10 BLC 614, [5].

Goenka Impex S.A. v Tallu Spinning Mills Ltd. [2013] 33 BLD 340.

Light Weight Body Armour Ltd. v Sri Lanka Army [2007] Sri Lanka Law Reports 411.

Wei, L. T. (2016). Introduction. In Wei, L. T., et al. (Eds.). China’s one belt one road initiative (p. 3). Imperial College Press.

Sooksripaisarnkit, P., & Garimella, S. R. (2018). ‘Introduction’. In Sooksripaisarnkit, P., & Garimella, S. R. (Eds.). China’s one belt one road initiative and private international law (Vol. 1, pp. 2–5). Routledge.

Carbone, G. (2012). The interference of the court of the seat with international arbitration. Journal of Dispute Resolution. 217, 219. https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1128&context=jdr.

Holtzmann, H. M., & Neuhaus, J. (1989) A guide to the UNCITRAL model law on international commercial arbitration: Legislative history and commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 910–1003). Kluwer Law International.

Hanotiau, B., Caprasse, O. (2008). Public policy in international commercial arbitration. In E. Gaillard, & D. Di Pietro (Eds.). Enforcement of arbitration agreements and international arbitral awards (Vol. 1, p. 787). Cameron.

Wolff, R. (Ed.) (2012). The New York convention: Convention on the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards of 10 June 1958—Commentary (Vol. 1, p. 406). Hart Publishing.

Mayer, P., Sheppard, A. (2003). Final ILA report on public policy as a bar to enforcement of international arbitral awards. Arbitration International, 19(2), 249. (“ILA’s Final Report”), 6.

Chen, H. H. -C. (2017). Predictability of ‘Public Policy’ in Article V of the New York convention under Mainland China’s judicial practice (pp. 11–26). Kluwer Law International.

Greenberg, S., Kee, C., & Weeramantry, J. R. (2011). International commercial arbitration—An Asia-Pacific perspective. CUP.

10.

Mattli, W. (2001). Private justice in a global economy: From litigation to arbitration. International Organization, 55(4), 919.

11.

Khambata, D. J. (2021). Chapter 10: Challenge and enforcement of awards: The brooding omnipresence of public policy. In Dave, D., et al. (Eds.). Arbitration in India (p. 195). Kluwer Law International.

Title: Conclusion and Observations
Authors: Bruno Zeller
Gautam Mohanty
Sai Ramani Garimella
Publisher: Springer Singapore
Book: Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards and the Public Policy Exception
Print ISBN: 978-981-16-2633-3

Electronic ISBN: 978-981-16-2634-0

Copyright Year: 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-2634-0_6

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Premium Partner