Recognition and Enforcement of International Arbitral Awards: A Comparative Study of Ugandan and UK Law and Practice

Abstract

This paper examines and critically analyses the current International legal regime governing the Recognition and Enforcement of international arbitral awards. It focuses on how the issues have been addressed under the 1958 New York and to a smaller extent the 1965 ICSID Conventions. It also analyses the refusal grounds for recognition and enforcement of International arbitral awards as provided under the New York Convention of 1958. The paper also looks at and critically analyses the refusal grounds of state immunity in relation to how it curtails recognition and enforcement of international arbitral awards. The paper looks at all the above in light of the comparative study the issues have been dealt with in United Kingdom and Uganda.The paper notes that there is no single legal regime governing recognition and enforcement of International arbitral awards and even the celebrated New York Convention have not yet met universal acceptance and some states parties have not yet domesticated it. The paper notes that the refusal grounds is a thorn in the ‘flesh’ of the winning party to an arbitration so much so that a balance needs to be struck to ensure that only genuine losers needs to rely on them to challenge recognition and enforcement of International Arbitral awards, much as the refusal grounds should be maintained, it should be sparingly applied.The paper concludes by recommending that the Ugandan Legislation needs to be updated to match the country’s commercial legal regime to ensure the realisation of commercial justice in the Country. This is premised on the fact that the Ugandan Arbitration and Conciliation Act is out-dated as compared to the UK Act which has just been updated as recent as 1996.