Sentences with phrase «enforce awards as»

Both countries enforce awards as they do court judgments, while non-compliance can be tackled through the courts, which so far has been largely supportive of arbitration and the enforcement of foreign awards.

He went on to say that «in our view, an application... for leave to enforce an award as a judgment is... one aspect of its recognition and as such is the final stage in rendering the arbitral procedure effective.

Not exact matches

CARACAS Venezuela on Thursday scorned a $ 2.04 billion award to ConocoPhillips over a decade - old nationalization as the U.S. oil producer filed suit in a federal court to enforce the decision.

If found by Sponsor to be in violation, Entrant agrees to pay all legal fees and damages incurred by Sponsor to enforce this provision, and, if applicable, return to Sponsor any award (s) received as liquidated damages.

If any arbitration or other proceeding is brought to enforce or interpret this Agreement or matters relating to it, the substantially prevailing party, as determined by the arbitrator's award, will be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys» fees and other costs and expenses incurred in such arbitration or proceeding from the other party, in addition to any other relief to which such prevailing party is entitled; provided that in no event will the arbitrator have the authority to award punitive damages.

Though the German courts recently ruled not to enforce the US court's decision (on the grounds that it considered the minimum statutory damages awarded to be excessive and punitive), Bossland ended sales for almost all of its hacks at the end of last year; as of today, the only ones remaining are for non-Blizzard games, specifically Final Fantasy XIV and Path of Exile, though according to the group's latest newsletter, there's a PUBG one tucked on the forums too.

Things have gone from bad to worse in Venezuela, as ConocoPhillips moves to seize some of the Caribbean assets of Venezuela's state - run PDVSA to enforce a $ 2 billion arbitration award.

Canadian courts have so far enforced US judgments with damage awards far larger than the value of the transaction — though none (so far as I know) with a really astronomical jury - chosen punitive element.

However, on 5 December, the Court of Appeal led by Chief Justice Pereira JA agreed that a purposive interpretation of Part 7.3 (5)(b) should be deployed and that the provision should be read as granting permission to enforce any judgment or arbitral award made «by a foreign court or tribunal and amenable to be enforced at common law».

In a 1978 decision, for instance, the Court of Appeal of Florence refused to enforce an award rendered in England by only two arbitrators, who had declined to appoint a third arbitrator on the basis of the 1950 English Arbitration Act, pursuant to which a clause providing for a three - member tribunal was deemed to take effect as if it provided for an umpire.

Nothing in the language of article V (1)(c) grants enforcing authorities the discretion to refuse or otherwise limit the recognition or enforcement of an award which has failed to address all issues submitted by the parties, but which is otherwise enforceable as to the issues addressed.

An arbitral award was rendered in India against a United States corporation, which argued before the Court that it should not be enforced in the United States on grounds that India would not have enforced the award had it been rendered in the United States in its favour, and that therefore, «the reciprocity between India and the United States as required by the Convention [article XIV] was absent».1394 The contesting party further argued that article XIV requires courts to determine the extent to which India applies the Convention and whether India treats awards rendered in India in favour of Indian parties in a similar manner.

As one United States court observed, «[u] nder the New York Convention, we examine whether the award exceeds the scope of the [arbitration agreement], not whether the award exceeds the scope of the parties» pleadings».803 This interpretation of article V (1)(c) which distinguishes the parties» pleadings or prayers for relief from the «submission to arbitration» referred to in article V (1)(c), is consistent with a narrow interpretation of the grounds for refusal to recognize or enforce an award.

For instance, the Supreme Court of Spain enforced an award rendered by a sole arbitrator appointed by one of the parties, where the party opposing enforcement had refused to appoint a co - arbitrator.883 Similarly, a United States court enforced an award rendered by one of the party appointees as a sole arbitrator where the other party chose not to participate in the arbitration.884

The Supreme Court considered whether the English Court, as an enforcing court of a Nigerian arbitral award, was entitled to require a party resisting enforcement to provide security for the money payable under the award as a condition of being entitled to advance a good arguable defence that enforcement should be refused on grounds of English public policy, e.g. because the award was procured by fraud.

The three dominant themes in 2008 cases where PIL was invoked were as follows: UK / EU law implementation of UNSC resolutions concerning freezing of alleged terrorist assets (sanctions cases); the acts / omissions of UK authorities in Iraq / Afghanistan viewed in the context of PIL and provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and Human Rights Act 1998 (Iraq / Afghanistan related cases); and state / diplomatic immunity in the context of civil proceedings and / or attempts to enforce arbitration awards against assets of State entities in the UK (Civil immunity cases).

He states that, in practice, it can take an average of 120 - 190 days to enforce a foreign award, owing to certain procedural formalities such as the translation and legalisation of awards, as well as providing evidence of notification of the unsuccessful party of the award.

Tullow's group's CEO Aidan Heavey cited the «expenses of further proceedings and the difficulty in enforcing any award against DRC, even in the event of success» as reasons for discontinuing legal proceedings.

Shelbaya agrees that the Egyptian courts adopt a «liberal approach to arbitration», putting in place «stringent criteria» for the setting aside of an arbitral award, as well as routinely recognising and enforcing foreign awards in Egypt.

Another approach to avoid this concern might be to regard immunity as inapplicable to a proceeding which relates directly to another, non-immune underlying proceeding only where it is a necessary or readily foreseeable corollary of that underlying proceeding — as is the case with proceedings to enforce a foreign arbitral award, but not, presumably, with a defamation action arising from statements made in an earlier proceeding.

While enforcement, a foreign arbitral award shall, on the application being made to the appropriate court by any party, be enforced by execution by the court under the Code of Civil Procedure 1908, in the same manner as if it were a decree of the domestic Court.

The terms of the arbitral award were turned into a consent court order, which ordered the Toronto Police Services to «assist as required» to enforce the provisions of the order.

Bechtel then subsequently enforced the award in France [4] and took steps to enforce the award in the US as well, [5] both of which are signatories to the NYC.

A successful litigant who has relied upon the Handbook as a route - map to judgment might justifiably feel let down at not being able to discover in a similarly practical and approachable manner how to enforce an award in the face of a recalcitrant employer.

However, the third paragraph of recital 12 complicates matters as it provides that where a member state court exercising jurisdiction under the Brussels I (recast) or national law has determined that an arbitration agreement is null and void, inoperative or incapable of being performed, the court's judgment on the substance of the matter can be recognised or enforced in accordance with Brussels I (recast)(although this is expressed as without prejudice to the competence of member state courts to decide on recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards in accorded with the New York Convention which «takes precedence over» Brussels I (recast)-RRB-.

This decision has been the subject of considerable discussion among arbitration practitioners: as was discussed several months ago on Slaw, the case raises a number of difficult questions about how international arbitration and Canada's treaty obligations in that respect interact with local procedural law — specifically limitation of actions — when seeking to enforce the award, and more generally whether foreign judgments and arbitral awards should continue to be treated, for limitations purposes, as mere contract debts.

The Claimants made a number of points in relation to service: first, they said that the Riyadh Convention was permissive in providing for service or notification by the means set out, not mandatory; secondly, they said that if it was mandatory it did not set out the documents which had to be served or notified in the prescribed manner, which was a matter for the DIFC Court; thirdly, and as an overriding point, if the KRG was not immune from suit, there had to be some way to enforce the Awards and the KRG could not be allowed to stymie service or notification under the Riyadh Convention by effectively claiming sovereign immunity unjustifiably.

The general obligation for the Contracting States to recognize such awards as binding and to enforce them in accordance with their rules of procedure is laid down in Article III.

Supreme Court Family Rule 2 - 1.2 provides that an arbitration award in a family law proceeding may be filed in the court registry and s. 29 of the Arbitration Act, provides that an arbitration award may be enforced in the same manner as a judgment or order of the Court.

The provisions of Articles 42 and 43 are mandatory in providing that compliant awards «shall be recognised as binding» and «shall be enforced» in the circumstances set out.

In the past decade, it has handled some of the most high - profile arbitrations as well as ancillary proceedings to enforce, or resist the enforcement of, arbitral awards before the English, Hong Kong and, through the Stephenson Harwood (Singapore) Alliance, Singapore courts.

The Ontario Court of Appeal recently released its endorsement in Alfred Wegener Institute v. ALCI Aviation Ltd., 2014 ONCA 398, upholding an order from the application judge that a German arbitral award be recognized and enforced in Ontario as if it were a judgment or order of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice.

The Claimants are seeking to enforce the two monetary awards (the «Second PFA» and the «Third PFA» respectively) in England and in the District Court of Columbia, as well as in the DIFC.

(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.

It did not as the Tribunal pointed out, pay any sums, when, on its own evidence, it was able to, prior to the Awards and it offered nothing by way of payment until the English Court made its order enforcing the peremptory order of the Tribunal.

As the matter limped through the Nigerian justice system, IPCO sought again in 2008 to enforce the award in England on the grounds that the Nigerian proceedings could take years.

-- Instructed by Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP LLP (as junior to Joe Smouha QC) for a Cayman hedge fund in its efforts to enforce an arbitration award for in excess of # 50 million against an Indian entity.

-- Instructed by Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP (as junior to Joe Smouha QC) for a Cayman hedge fund in its efforts to enforce an arbitration award for in excess of # 50 million against an Indian entity.

The use of the word may gives the enforcing court a discretion as to whether to refuse to enforce an award that has been set aside and there is little consensus internationally on the approach to be adopted.

An arbitral award made in England may, by leave of the court, be enforced in the same manner as a judgment or order of the court (section 66).

Further, where the award or arbitration agreement requiring to be produced is in a foreign language, the party seeking to enforce the award shall produce a translation into English certified as correct by a diplomatic or consular agent of the country to which that party belongs or certified as correct in such other manner as may be sufficient according to the law in force in the Union of Myanmar.

In this issue: The development of arbitration in the Asia - Pacific region; The English Commercial Court refuses to enforce a New York Convention award; Further development of Dubai as a regional arbitration hub: the launch of EMAC (Emirates Maritime Arbitration Centre); Removal of an arbitrator due to lack of impartiality: a recent English Commercial Court case; Conferences and events

The Act lists a variety of proceedings in respect of which there is no limitation period (section 16): proceedings for declarations; proceedings to enforce court orders and other orders that are enforceable in the same way as court orders; proceedings under the Family Law Act relating to support; proceedings to enforce arbitration awards; proceedings by persons in possession of collateral to redeem or realize on it; proceedings arising from sexual assault in certain circumstances; proceedings to recover fines, taxes and penalties owing to the Crown; proceedings relating to claims by the Crown (or by a delivery agent under social welfare legislation) in various circumstances; proceedings to recover money owing in respect of certain student loans, awards and grants.

Dispute as to whether previous award of damages for breach of a «keep open» clause in a commercial lease precluded the landlords from enforcing the repairing obligation and having the vacant premises put into a condition whereby they could immediately be traded from.

Enforcing an arbitration award under the Arbitration Act 1996 can prove a bumpy ride, as Clare Arthurs & Margaret Tofalides explain

Each level of people's court should establish a centralized administrative platform for the judicial review of arbitration awards, to strengthen the informatized management and data analysis of cases regarding applications to confirm the validity of an arbitation agreement, cases regarding applications to cancel or enforce arbitration awards of our domestic arbitration institutions, applications to recognize and enforce Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Macau Special Administrative Region, Taiwan Region arbitration awards, cases regarding applications to recognize and enforce foreign arbitral awards, and cases relating to the judicial review of arbitration such as refusal to accept, reject the filing, or objection to jurisdiction and others relating to the confirmation of the validity of an arbitration agreement; the effective guarantee of the correct application of law and of a unified yardstick for judicial decision - making.

As mentioned previously, some SPC proceedings, including capital punishment review and review of lower court rulings not to enforce foreign or foreign - related arbitral awards, are not considered «court hearings.»

Mr. D'vitre placed reliance on the judgment of English court of Appeal in case of Kanoria and others vs. Guinness (2006) 1 LLR 701 in support of the submission that even though in that matter challenged to the award in India had failed, English Court of appeal had refused to enforce foreign award as the aggrieved party was not given due notice of plea of fraud and was unable to represent its case.

In so far as reliance placed by the learned senior counsel for the respondent in case of Kanoria and others vs. Guinness reported in (2006) 1 Llyod's Law Reports 701 in support of the submission that though petition under section 34 challenging a foreign award in India had failed, English Court of Appeal had refused to enforce foreign award on the ground that aggrieved party who was not given due notice of plea of fraud and was unable to represent its case is concerned, a perusal of the judgment indicates that the Court of Appeal had rendered a finding that the aggrieved party who was unable to represent its case and had refused to enforce the foreign award.

(D) The establishment of a Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional Practice for the Institute, Society or Council which are not inconsistent with the Code of Ethics of the National Association as from time to time amended; provided, however, that in order for its members to be eligible for Institute Affiliate Membership pursuant to Article III, such Institute, Society or Council must adopt and enforce the National Association's Code of Ethics or a code of ethics approved by the National Association that addresses the specialty area of that Institute, Society or Council, which code of ethics must apply to all persons who have been awarded a professional designation and those who hold classes of membership that confer the right to vote or hold office;