Sentences with phrase «arbitral awards within»

In the meantime, the DIFC Court Law (DIFC Law No. 10 of 2004) gives the Court of First Instance discretion to ratify and enforce foreign arbitral awards within the DIFC.

Nevertheless, the Court of Appeals does recognize public policy as a potential ground for vacating an arbitral award within the new statutory «on other reasonable ground [s]» provision.

In the spirit of this overall duty, the FAI Rules impose a number of obligations on the arbitral tribunal and the parties that are designed to reduce time and costs of the proceedings, including an obligation on the arbitral tribunal to render the final arbitral award within nine months from the receipt of the final award.

Not exact matches

One United States District Court found that an award for consequential damages was within the submission to arbitrate even though consequential damages were explicitly precluded by the terms of the underlying contract, in circumstances where consequential damages were included in the terms of reference and a reasoned award by the arbitral tribunal justified their application.823

The scope was further refined such that «[s] ettlement agreements reached during judicial or arbitral proceedings but not recorded in a judicial decision or an arbitral award should fall within the scope of the instrument.»

Generally, all you have to do to enforce an arbitral award under the Act is make a court application within two years receiving the award.

Regarding the arbitral awards rendered in 2017, the following can be observed: Under the Arbitration Rules, 28 % of awards were rendered within 6 months of referral, 44 % within 6 - 12 months; under the Expedited Rules, 54 % of awards were rendered within 3 months, and 38 % within 3 - 6 months of referral.

While we will be featuring posts over the coming days on this award that dissect and analyze the award, its international legal significance, and its larger geopolitical consequences for all claimants to the South China Sea dispute and third - party actors (such as the United States), for now, a close read of all 479 pages of this arbitral award reveals it to be an extremely rich and fertile piece of international jurisprudence, one that will certainly have far - ranging doctrinal impacts as an international judicial decision that is also an authoritative subsidiary means for determination of the international law rules under UNCLOS, especially on questions such as the: 1) normative weight of «historic rights» and differentiating the same from «historic title» and «historic rights short of sovereignty», and clarifying what could still possibly amount to historic rights that States could still validly assert within the UNCLOS treaty regime;

(1) An arbitral award, irrespective of the State or jurisdiction in which it was made, shall be recognised as binding within the DIFC and, upon application in writing to the DIFC Court, shall be enforced subject to the provisions of this Article and of Articles 43 and 44.

The arbitral tribunal may extend, if necessary, the period of time within which it shall make the award.

If a party, duly invited by the arbitral tribunal to produce documents, exhibits or other evidence, fails to do so within the established period of time, without showing sufficient cause for such failure, the arbitral tribunal may make the award on the evidence before it.

The arbitral tribunal may within 30 days after the communication of the award make such corrections on its own initiative.

Within 30 days after the receipt of the award, a party, with notice to the other parties and the Secretariat, may request that the arbitral tribunal give an interpretation of the award.

Within 30 days after the receipt of the award, a party, with notice to the other parties and the Secretariat, may request the arbitral tribunal to correct in the award any error in computation, any clerical or typographical error, or any error or omission of a similar nature.

If the arbitral tribunal considers the request for an award or additional award to be justified, it shall render or complete its award within 60 days after the receipt of the request.

In fact, the Singapore High Court went further to state that it would be an abuse of process to allow a party who had raised a jurisdictional challenge but chose not to participate in most part of the arbitration, to wait till the opposing party goes through the entire arbitral process, obtains an award, only to be met by a setting aside application at the seat when it could have done so within the 30 - day period under Article 16 (3) of the Model Law.

The FPSW Order requires offerors for government contracts to disclose whether there have been any «administrative merits determination, arbitral award or decision, or civil judgment... rendered against the offeror within the preceding 3 - year period» for violations of any of 14 federal labor laws and equivalent state laws.

27 (1) If the party who commenced the arbitration does not submit a statement within the period of time specified under subsection 25 (1), the arbitral tribunal may, unless the party offers a satisfactory explanation, make an award dismissing the claim.

The petition for annulment should be initiated within one month from the date the arbitral award is issued.

The arbitral award should be given to the parties within fifteen days of rendering the judgement.

Finally, the claimant submitted that, all else failing, the case could be brought within one of the heads of CPR 6.20, namely «(9) a claim... made to enforce any judgment or arbitral award».