In this case, when the subject matter of the dispute is highly technical, arbitrators with an appropriate degree of expertise can be appointed (as one cannot “choose the judge” in litigation). Arbitration awards are generally easier to enforce in some countries than court judgements. In most legal systems, there are very limited avenues for appeal of an arbitral award, which can be either an advantage because the dispute solved faster. Arbitration can produce different solutions that are not court based. The awards could be compensation, an explanation for what happened, an apology, a promise never to repeat
Enforcement of arbitral award can be refused if it is breach of "Public Policy”. However in this case ONGC Ltd v Saw Pipe Ltd , it was held that the expression where an award was suffering from patent of law error or in conflict with public policy under section 48(2)(b) can be set aside for patently illegal. This has a significant explanation under section 48 of the 1996 Act in consonance with Article v of the New York Convention. Under Section 48(1) and (2) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 a foreign award will not be enforced in India if it is proved by the party against whom it is sought to be enforced that the parties to the agreement were, under few circumstances, if the party is suffering from incapacity or if its outside the scope of the agreement or if an agreement is invalid,
In this case, the parties of the dispute produce their own cases. Later, they will inquire the arbitrator to decide one out of the two. Based on the evidence proved by the parties, the arbitrator will conclude upon the preciseness of either submissions of the parties and later grant an award in favor of the particular party. This type of arbitration had been defined as a kind of arbitrator where the arbitrator himself bases his award on the submissions of the disputing parties which he thinks is more reasonable and legitimate. It is proven that this will strengthen and encourage both parties to be more honest in their submissions in order to prevent diffraction.
Any rejection based on unreasonable grounds would be implies to be intent to waste the time and resources of the tribunal and the other party. 4. Where there is a mutual agreement in writing on how the cost should be allocated, the arbitrator may decide to uphold this agreement. Relying on the above stated principle, both parties may agree on how the costs should be shared or borne. This may be included in the length of the contract terms or may be a collateral contract to this effect.
INTRODUCTION It is the most common perception of people to prosecute and punish those who commit war crimes or atrocities against humanity, nonetheless they should be given a fair trial. A fair trial, free from judicial bias and political pressures is a legal right. The fairness is not only the prerogative of the victims but also the accused for it is an important component of the mandate to the International Court of Justice. To interpret fairness one requires a more holistic concept not just limiting to judicial proceeding but one that effectively helps parties realise their rights under the Rome Statute. The concept of fairness in international criminal law is derived from its predecessor, international human rights law.
In order to appeal you will need to write a letter to your employer stating that you do not agree with the decision and stating your reasons why. Your employer will arrange a grievance appeal meeting which you have the right to be accompanied to and your employer will provide the outcome of the grievance appeal meeting in writing. • employment tribunal – if you disagree with the outcome of the grievance appeal meeting then you should seek advice about making an employment tribunal claim (see A Guide to Employment Tribunals section for more information). Be aware that an employment tribunal claim must be made within 3 months less one day of the action you’re complaining
The other judges of the House shared the same thoughts with that of their learned and noble friend Lord Keith. They all answered the certified question in the approving and reject the appeal. The case was reviewed by the European court of Human Rights and it was decided that the conviction of the R v R was a breach of article 7 of the European Convention on Human rights, extent to a conviction for an act that wasn’t a criminal offence when committed. The judgement in this case was supported by the Law Commission and was later confirmed in statute law by an amendment to the sexual Offences Act in the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.
This is shown in the case of Zurich Chamber of Commerce which heard on 31 May 1996, where the Arbitral Tribunal pointed out that Russian law rejected to grant specific performance. Thus, pursuant to CISG, a judgment for specific performance cannot be entered if the national Court rejected such claim. The Arbitral Tribunal then awarded the buyers damages for their actual loss.
Complainants filed lawsuits nationwide with varying claims of injustice. As a result, the rejection of these lawsuits were abundant by lower courts. However, the appeals court process was successful for some of these complainants on varying reasonings, consistency was not prevalent in the beginning. Conlon references in his article that the complaints range from violation of due process, rebuttal presumption, confrontation, the right against self-incrimination, and ordinances conflicting with state law, tickets issued for non-moving violation when clearly the vehicle was in motion in the intersection which resulted in the inability to fight the ticket (197-229). Due process along with rebuttal presumption appears to be the most egregious complaints, in which penalties imposed on the owners of the vehicles, even if they were not the driver of the vehicle.
OVERVIEW: Litigation, Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and Criminal prosecution are everyday occurrence in the judicial system. For better understanding, I will briefly define what each terms stands for. Litigation is Ultimate legal method for settling controversies or disputes between and among persons, organizations, and the State. Alternative dispute resolution (ADR); refers to a variety of processes that help parties resolve disputes without a trial. Typical ADR processes include mediation, arbitration, neutral evaluation, and collaborative law.