One United States court observed that the Convention does not «permit reviewing courts to police every procedural ruling made by the arbitrator and to
set aside the award if any violation of the -LSB-...] procedures is found.
Sections 24 (a) and 31 (4)(b) of the IAA deal with different situations — section 24 (a) provides that the Singapore High Court may
set aside an award if the making of the award was induced or affected by fraud or corruption, while section 31 (4)(b) provides that the Singapore High Court may refuse to enforce a foreign award if such enforcement would be contrary to the public policy of Singapore.
Not exact matches
Contracting officers may
set aside contracts in these industries
if the contract can be
awarded at a fair and reasonable price, the contracting officer has a reasonable expectation that two or more WOSBs or EDWOSBs will submit offers for the contract and the anticipated contract price is not greater than $ 5 million for manufacturing contracts and $ 3 million for other contracts.
If a payment is
awarded based on that appraisal, it can be
set aside in two ways.
The court reasoned that the wording of the arbitration agreement had not made it clear that the parties regarded the venue as critically important.898 The courts of the United States have similarly considered that the «appropriate standard of review would be to
set aside an
award based on a procedural violation only
if such violation caused substantial prejudice to the complaining party.»
There is a natural justice risk that an eventual
award may be
set aside if the losing party could show that the med - arbiter based her decision on confidential (undisclosed) information.
[139] It is important to remember that, even
if section 44 (2) is repealed and the parties choose not to agree to an appeal under section 44 (1), a party can still apply to court in appropriate circumstances to
set aside an arbitral
award under section 45 of the Alberta Act.
If the
award is subject to an action for
setting aside in the country in which, or under the law of which, it is made («the country of origin»), the foreign court before which enforcement of the
award is sought may adjourn its decision on enforcement (Article VI).
This applies only to circumstances where the parties reside in different provinces or
if the proposed decision to refuse enforcement or
set aside a domestic arbitral
award is made on the ground of «violating the public interests».
If the Intermediate People's Court intends to invalidate an arbitral agreement,
set aside an arbitral
award, or refuse enforcement in a domestic judicial review case, it shall report to and obtain approval from the Higher People's Court.
Section 46 (d) provides that where the court is satisfied that an application for the
setting aside or for the suspension of the
award has been made to a competent authority referred to in subsection (b) of section 46, the court may,
if it considers proper to do so, postpone the order to enforce the
award and may also order the respondent to provide appropriate security on the application of the party claiming enforcement of the
award.
[34]... [the Applicants] state as a fact that a Court which, having agreed that certain government action was inconsistent with the Constitution and having therefore
set it
aside, will nonetheless be seen to be, and will in fact be, «in bed» with the government
if it fails to
award the successful applicant its solicitor client costs.
Drawing on Whiten v. Pilot Insurance Co., 2002 SCC 18,
if an
award of punitive damages, together with the compensatory damages
awarded, «produces a total sum that is so «inordinately large» that it exceeds what is «rationally» required to punish the defendant, it will be reduced or
set aside on appeal».
[62] Putting the test the other way around, «
if the
award of punitive damages when added to compensatory damages, produces a total sum that is so «inordinately large» that it exceeds what is «rationally» required to punish the defendant, it will be reduced or
set aside on appeal,»: see Whiten, at para. 109.
Learned senior counsel submits that
if such finding of forgery rendered by the learned arbitrator which amounts to a serious criminal::: Downloaded on - 13/05/2014 23:52:28::: Kvm 42/107 ARBP259.13 charge is not
set aside, such
award would be a decree of this Court and would be executed by the claimant by filing criminal proceedings against the respondent based on such perverse finding which are without jurisdiction, such
award would be thus in conflict with public policy under Section 34 of the Act and even under the narrower ground of public policy while considering the objection to the enforcement of a foreign
award as held by the SC in case of Shri Lal Mahal Ltd..