We found a match
Your institution may have rights to this item. Sign in to continue.
- Title
A COMPARATIVE REVIEW ON SUBSTANTIVE PUBLIC POLICY IN INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION.
- Authors
Inae Yang
- Abstract
In recent decades, arbitration of international commercial disputes has increased and is likely to continue to grow. Many businesses prefer arbitration to litigation in court because of its relative promptness, privacy and economy. However, in some instances, arbitration requires the support of national courts to be effective when arbitral awards are not satisfied through voluntary compliance of the parties. Among many claims, the public policy defense under the New York Convention is most frequently invoked and has also become one of the most controversial grounds for refusing to enforce arbitral awards. This article examines examples and case law that deals with objections to enforcement of foreign arbitral awards based on substantive public policy concerns. Substantive public policy challenges are directed at the merits of arbitral awards. Substantive grounds offered for objection have included payments of excessive interest or costs, violations of Islamic legal principles, violations of competition laws, violations of bankruptcy rules, violations of consumer protection laws, foreign exchange controls, illegal contracts, foreign policy, and the principle of comity.
- Subjects
UNITED States; INTERNATIONAL commercial arbitration -- Cases; PUBLIC policy (Law); COMPARATIVE law; JUDICIAL assistance; CONVENTION on the Recognition &; Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958); INTERNATIONAL trade dispute resolution; ISLAMIC law; LAW enforcement -- International cooperation
- Publication
Dispute Resolution Journal, 2015, Vol 70, Issue 2, p49
- ISSN
1074-8105
- Publication type
Article