Foreign Arbitral Award Case Study

1417 Words6 Pages
ENFORCEABILITY OF FOREIGN ARBITRAL AWARDS
INRODUCTION:
In the recent years, increasing international trade and investment is augmented and accompanied by excrescence in mechanism, international commerce and free trade have become global necessities. International arbitration has played a pivotal role in solving cross border transactions and also emanated as the preferred option for resolving cross-border commercial disputes and preserving business relationships. International legal systems are no more antiquated in archaic or obsolete manner. Foreign Arbitral Award indicates that there should be a cogent recognition of the proposition that arbitral awards should be enforceable anywhere, regardless of where made. To successfully prolong in litigation
…show more content…
This is covered by the part II of the Act, 1996. It is based on the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNICATRAL) model law on International Commercial Arbitration." India is also a signatory to the New York Convention (1960) and the Geneva Convention (1924)". But only in few circumstances, Indian courts may refuse to enforce foreign award set out in Article v of the New York convention which has been obliterated by the supreme court in the recent cases, The principle laid down in Bhatia International v Bulk Trading S.A., is that the parties can exclude application of all or any provisions of part I by an agreement express or implied. This principle was applied in JG Engineers (P) Ltd v Union of India and Dozco India (P) Ltd v Doosan Infracore Co Ltd. Law governed should be with respect to foreign and judicial seat of arbitration with an agreement between the contracting countries stipulated outside India. It is noteworthy that these judgments were delivered to fill the lacunae that existed in the Act.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act can be a adroit legislation with apt enactments dealt practically. Interpreting judicial maters in a practical prospect was of great significance in its applicability. It should also suspect to a "leave for enforcement" which confirms the existence of the arbitration agreement, for its compliance in good terms to enforce
…show more content…
United States have vivid predilection in favor of enforcement of a foreign award. American law has no uniform standards in governing the enforcement of foreign awards. They totally depend on doctrine of comity to enforce awards and they may also consider the doctrine of reciprocity. Reciprocity is a permissible factor, but not a prerequisite . Majority of the countries constitute rule of practice, convenience and expediency. It is accepted that awards can be partially recognized and enforced. In majority of the reported countries, partial enforcement is permitted outside the scope of Art. Iv.1(c) NYC and it is not permitted within the scope of Art.v.1(c) NYC, which expressly denotes the partial enforcement. Only in certain countries like Canada, England, Israel, Netherlands, partial enforcement is permitted within the scope. But in Argentina and Finland, partial enforcement will be awarded only if supplicated by the applicant. But the only exception is found in India where a distinction is made between awards from reciprocity territories and Non-reciprocity territories. Reservations should be entreated by the countries enforcing arbitral award. Three types of reservations should be assigned, award should be issued in member state, related to commercial transactions and also in reciprocity. Finally, The New York convention has given a prodigious boost in resolving

More about Foreign Arbitral Award Case Study

Open Document