Recognition Of Foreign Arbitral Awards Research Articles

The New Arbitration Law in Tanzania: An Appraisal of Its Salient Features and Implications for Investment Disputes Settlement

Preference for arbitration as an option for dispute settlement is steadily on the rise, partly because of its perceived efficacious proceedings and enforceability. In 2020, Tanzania enacted a new legislation on arbitration with a detailed and defined framework, cascading through the entire qualifying process of arbitrators, initiating the arbitration proceedings, enforcement and recognition of foreign arbitral awards. This article analyses the corpus of the new legislation, its pertinent structural features, the gaps, and future prospects. The analysis is predicated on the ramifications of the new arbitration law for investment dispute settlements, particularly, state versus investors disputes, as envisaged under the national investment legislation. It concludes by highlighting several aspects which need to be revisited, such as the independence of arbitrators, duty to refer disputes to arbitration, and determination of arbitration costs. Further, a case is made for amendment of the existing national investment legislation in respect of dispute settlement provisions in order to create a harmonious arbitration regime in Tanzania. Tanzania arbitration law, implications to investment disputes, enforcement of foreign arbitral awards

Homologação de sentença arbitral estrangeira: reflexos da Convenção de Nova Iorque

O presente estudo analisa os fundamentos e a obrigatoriedade de homologação da sentença arbitral estrangeira pelo Poder Judiciário nacional, com o fim de produzir efeitos no sistema jurídico interno, em comparação com o tratamento previsto para a sentença arbitral nacional. A arbitragem é forma alternativa de solução de conflitos que cada vez mais ganha espaço no âmbito empresarial. No plano internacional, a arbitragem tem como norma jurídica de destaque a Convenção de Nova Iorque, de 1958, incorporada ao ordenamento jurídico nacional pelo Decreto 4.311/2002. Essa norma estabelece as diretrizes para o reconhecimento de sentenças arbitrais estrangeiras, respeitando a soberania de cada Estado signatário, pois prevê que a sua execução deve ocorrer em conformidade com as regras de procedimento do território no qual a decisão arbitral é invocada.

The Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards in the GCC Countries: Focus on Kuwait

Kuwait is a member country of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). As with the other countries in the GCC, Sharia law informs its laws. The use of the New York Convention (NYC) to resolve disputes has come into conflict with Sharia law if the choice of law is from another system of laws. This means that Kuwait has followed the procedures of the NYC, under the principle of reciprocity, as the main ground for disqualifying enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Kuwait. The legislation and practices that guide the enforcement and recognition of foreign arbitral awards are not only limited to the international standards under the NYC and the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law. The domestic laws adopt the international standards as well as incorporating the reservation clauses and the reciprocity aspects. The article also seeks to elucidate the grounds that do not inform the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. These include procedural and substantive technicalities that arise from non-adherence to the law, the competency of the arbitrators, the legality of the arbitral awards, as well as other stipulations in the Code of Civil and Commercial Procedure (CCCP). This article examines the application of arbitral law in the Middle East and how effective this is in settling trade disputes. A broader perspective will also be taken as this article will consider the issues that have been associated with the application of arbitral law in preference to conservative land laws in the region. The place of arbitral awards that are rendered abroad is also a focus of the article, as are the procedures and conditions that are considered in enforcing them in Kuwait. Arbitrability and non-arbitrability of foreign arbitral awards is also examined based mainly on the choice of law or where the arbitral award is from a country that does not enforce or recognise arbitral awards declared against it.

Os Diferentes Níveis de Ordem Pública sob uma Perspectiva da Jurisprudência Brasileira em Arbitragens Doméstica e Internacional

ABSTRACT: The Brazilian Arbitration Law (the BAL), in its art. 2, paragraph 1, refers to public policy as a limit, to which arbitrators must pay heed, on the free exercise of volition by the parties. In art. 39, II, the BAL cites public policy as grounds for rejection of an application for recognition of a foreign arbitral award by Brazilian courts (specifically the Superior Court of Justice - STJ). Public policy is therefore of major importance in arbitration but it is difficult to establish its limits and scope. The author of this paper therefore argues that the doctrine of public policy should be applied in three distinct levels, with the arbitrator/judge to decide on the relative weight of each level in accordance with the nature of the dispute in hand. The first part of this article seeks to define the concept of public policy and address its application to domestic and international arbitrations particularly those which apply foreign (i.e. non - Brazilian) law. The second part deals with public order in relation to the recognition of foreign arbitral awards, drawing on case law from the STJ on the issue.

Enforcement of Foreign Arbitration Awards in Denmark

In this paper the grounds for refusal of the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Denmark will be reviewed and analysed in accordance with the relevant legislation, mainly, Danish Arbitration Act, the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, and case law. The reference to other jurisdictions will be made when appropriate in order to illustrate the similarities or distinctions in different legal regimes for better understanding of the relevant Danish regulation.In the first chapter of this paper the growing importance of the arbitration as such will be discussed briefly along with the status of the New York Convention in Denmark. In the second chapter Section 39 of the Danish Arbitration Act will be analysed in detail and compared with the New York Convention in order to get an overview of available defences to the enforcement and recognition of a foreign arbitral awards in Denmark. In the third chapter the relevant conclusions will be made.

Les récents progrès de la jurisprudence brésilienne en matière d’arbitrage commercial international

Brazilian arbitration practice was influenced by three landmark events: the enactment, in 1996, of the Brazilian Arbitration Act (Federal Law No. 9.307), the adhesion, in 2002, to the New York Convention and the enactment of Constitutional Amendment No. 45, on 31 December 2004, which transferred to the Superior Court (?Superior Tribunal de Justiça?) the competence for the recognition of foreign arbitral awards previously held by the Supreme Court (?Supremo Tribunal Federal?). The Brazilian Arbitration Act gave great impulse to the use of arbitration domestically, whilst the ratification of the New York Convention introduced Brazil in the group of receptive countries and in the list of recommended places of arbitration. Nonetheless, the transfer of competence to the Superior Court triggered a new trend in local courts more favorable to arbitration and more in line with international practice. For instance, the validity of arbitration clauses signed by state-owned companies and of arbitration clauses included in contracts that were not signed by all the parties have been finally recognized. These cases clearly illustrate this important movement towards a more comprehensive approach from Brazilian judges with respect to arbitration and their concern to provide a more stable legal environment for the development of local economy.

Seetransport Wiking Trader Schiffarhtsgesellschaft MBH & Co, Kommanditgesellschaft v. Navimpex Centralia Navala

559State immunity — Instrumentality or agency of State — Enforcement of arbitral award against instrumentality of State — Whether ICC arbitration award and decision of a French court upholding validity of award enforceable in the United States against a State instrumentality — Whether immunity impliedly waived by agreement in contract to arbitrate in accordance with ICC rules and where State is signatory to Convention on Enforcement and Recognition of Foreign Arbitral Awards — The law of the United States