Sentences with phrase «of arbitral decisions»

Another possibility is that the Sattva decision applies to the review of arbitral decisions and these Ontario Court of Appeal decisions apply to the review of lower court decisions.

Stolt - Nielsen and this case thus fall on opposite sides of the line that § 10 (a)(4) draws to delimit judicial review of arbitral decisions.

If an individual decision is wrong on a point of law, there is often no continuing damage done to the general legal principle because other arbitrators are unlikely to hear of that arbitral decision and are not obliged to follow it even if they do.

Not exact matches

Article V (1)(c) of the New York Convention allows the competent authorities in Contracting States to refuse recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award, or part of that award, where the award contains decisions on matters «beyond the scope of the submission to arbitration».

Against this background, the ICC Commission's Task Force of Decisions as to Costs has reviewed hundreds of arbitral awards and has analysed in what manner arbitral tribunals exercise their discretion.

In a highly anticipated decision (Gazprom C - 536 / 13) the European Court of Justice (the «ECJ») has clarified that anti-suit injunctions issued by arbitral tribunals are...

The arbitral award noted that this decision was taken with the agreement of the parties, and the party opposing enforcement had not reserved it rights at the time of the decision or following receipt of letters confirming the decision.

Summary: The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court a decision of the Svea Court of Appeal, which had rejected the appellant's application to declare an arbitral award invalid on the basis that...

Summary: The appellant appealed a judgment by the Svea Court of Appeal to uphold an arbitral tribunal's finding that an arbitration clause applied to a dispute but to amend the tribunal's decision...

The courts have delivered several decisions over the last few years that establish that they have a better understanding of the limited and supportive role they are expected to play in arbitral proceedings, taking a stand back from the largely interventionist role they once played.

2014 has started with a bang from an arbitration perspective with the decision in S v S [2014] EWHC 7 (Fam), [2014] All ER (D) 63 (Jan), involving the conversion of an arbitration award to a financial consent order and comments from Sir James Munby that «an arbitral award is surely of its nature even stronger than a simple agreement between the parties» and «the judge will not need to play the detective unless something leaps off the page to indicate that something has gone so seriously wrong in the arbitral process as fundamentally to vitiate the arbitral award».

The site can be searched by keyword with filters for such things as type of text (Court Decision, Arbitral Awards, Doctrine, Clause, Legislation or Principles) or language (English, French, German, Italian, Spanish, Dutch, Portugese and Latin).

[7] While excluding judicial decisions and arbitral awards will limit the number of parties served by the instrument, the working group considered it best to avoid «overlap» with other conventions and minimize confusion among enforcement authorities over which instrument applies, although the final wording of this provision remains to be determined.

Article 7 (2) of the Judicial Authority Law provides for the enforcement outside the DIFC of «judgments, decisions and orders rendered by the [DIFC] Courts and the Arbitral Awards ratified by the [DIFC] Courts».

The author concludes by identifying some important points that French courts should tackle in the future, that is, the admissibility of challenges against decisions rendered by arbitral institutions, and their role in the proceedings concerning challenges against arbitral awards.

Over the past few years, there have been a number of notable developments in arbitration in the Middle East: institutional rules, legislative changes and significant decisions of the courts, including in relation to enforcement of arbitral awards.

For example, though not explicitly stated in this decision, the high thresholds that must be met in order to refuse the recognition of an arbitral award in Ontario may represent the Court reinforcing their commitment to international comity in light of globalization trends.

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.»

In reaching this decision, the High Court undertook a review of past Singapore case law and legal commentary on the nature and purpose of Article 34 (2)(a)(iii), ultimately deciding that «as a matter of policy, to hold that Art 34 (2)(a)(iii) does not apply, where no other limb under Art 34 (2) would be engaged, would allow an arbitral tribunal to immunize its awards against judicial scrutiny by delivering its conclusions on both jurisdiction and merits in a single award», which would have been an «unsatisfactory result».

However, the record of Egyptian decisions concerning the interpretation and application of the New York Convention «shows an entrenched respect for the arbitral process», says Shelbaya.

Arbitral tribunal decisions are widely enforceable internationally (including in China and the United States) under a number of conventions, including the New York Convention, of which the UK is a direct contracting party.

The decision establishes new limitations to gaining judicial review of arbitration rulings, a move observers say serves to further reinforce the court's long - standing deference to arbitral awards.

Furthermore, an emergency decision ceases to be binding if an arbitration procedure is not commenced within 30 days, alternatively the case has not been referred to an arbitrator or arbitral tribunal within 90 days, from the date of the emergency decision.

This sort of approach, with its openness to reasoning by incorporation, makes it very tough to challenge arbitral decisions under Newfoundland Nurses.

On the decision, John told Lexpert that «the message that [the SCC] and various courts of appeal have sent out over the past decade or more, that when parties decide to arbitrate disputes and the arbitrator makes a decision, a great deal of deference is to be given by the court to the arbitral tribunal.»

In a decision recently published on the Swedish Arbitration Portal, the Svea Court of Appeal dismissed a party's challenge to the arbitral award, finding that the tribunal had not exceeded its mandate and did not breach the principle of equal treatment of the parties.

Throughout his legal and judicial career, Rothstein has authored more than 100 judgments and arbitral decisions on domestic and cross-border cases of commercial significance and complexity.

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal by a majority of three to two, reversing the High Court and Court of Appeal decisions which had set aside arbitral orders in the appellant's favour.

Vivian Hood, Jaffe's Managing Director of Client Services, spoke on a panel at the ARIAS - U.S. Spring Conference 2014 titled «How Does Social Media Change Hiring and Arbitral Decisions?»

Arbitral decisions have been increasingly challenged over the last ten years; while most of these failed to overturn initial rulings, the last five years have seen a few succeed.

In a decision recently published on the Swedish Arbitration Portal, the Svea Court of Appeal dismissed a party's challenge to the arbitral award, finding that the party was precluded from challenging award on several ground, and had failed to establish that the tribunal had been partial.

Keep an eye on the dispute between ConocoPhillips and Venezuela over the illegal expropriation of oil investments to watch how another sovereign state attempts to push back against arbitral decision: Venezuela is currently trying to get the ruling overturned.

Unifor, Local 433 v. Crown Packaging Ltd. (Giesbrecht Grievance), [2014] B.C.C.A.A.A. No. 43 (Dorsey) is a recent arbitral decision considering the admissibility of surveillance evidence in British Columbia.

In a decision recently published on the Swedish Arbitration Portal, the Svea Court of Appeal dismissed a party's challenge to the arbitral award, finding that the tribunal had not exceeded its mandate.

The SCC decision in the Yugraneft case could be interesting as a policy signal in this regard and will hopefully serve as motivation for legislative action clarifying the procedural status of all international arbitral awards.

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.

However, the fact remains that this «equal treatment» is a result of judicial interpretation of the procedural status of international arbitral awards, not of a clear legislative decision in this sense.

During the arbitration procedure and until the arbitral decision, neither entity shall act in a manner that may affect the rights of the other Party under these HoA / Service Agreement.

The published materials include three decisions from 2016 - 2017, in which Russian courts recognized SCC arbitral awards as enforceable on the territory of the Russian Federation.

Researchers at Harvard University and the University of Arizona are conducting a study into how international arbitrators make decisions and are therefore seeking input from the arbitral community.

Decisions of judicial bodies may be regarded as carrying greater (political rather than legal) authority than that of arbitral tribunals.

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;

In a decision recently published on the Swedish Arbitration Portal, the Supreme Court affirmed a decision of the Svea Court of Appeal, which had rejected an appellant's application to declare an arbitral award invalid on the basis that it violated public policy.

The more than 1,400 court decisions reported in the Yearbook: Commercial Arbitration show that enforcement of an arbitral award is granted in almost 90 per cent of the cases.

When there is more than one arbitrator, any award or other decision of the arbitral tribunal shall be made by a majority of the arbitrators.

BIAC shall perform the following main tasks (with the right to perform additional tasks as the case may be pursuant to a decision of the Governing Board): (a) Receive requests for the appointment of an Arbitral Tribunal by the Governing Board (Art. 4 (1) of the Rules).

The arbitral tribunal shall in the final award or, if it deems appropriate, in any other award, determine any amount that a party may have to pay to another party as a result of the decision on allocation of costs.

The Supreme Court's decision is the latest in a series of important appellate judgments arising out of the long - running dispute concerning the enforcement of a Nigerian arbitral award between NNPC, the Nigerian state - owned oil company, and IPCO.

Reciprocal enforcement of judgments in Abu Dhabi and ADGM free zone: a new Memorandum of Understanding («MoU») sets out the framework for the reciprocal enforcement of judgments, decisions and orders and the arbitral awards ratified or recognised by the onshore civil law courts in Abu Dhabi and the common law courts in Abu Dhabi's financial free zone, ADGM.

A decision by the arbitral tribunal that the contract or other legal instrument is null, void, or invalid shall not entail automatically the invalidity of the arbitration clause.