Sentences with phrase «which enforcement of the foreign award»

In reality, this reservation is more theoretical than anything else, because codified French arbitration law itself does not contain any such limitation, and article VII (1) of the Convention confirms that the Convention does not deprive parties of more favourable rights they might enjoy under the law of the country in which enforcement of the foreign award is sought.

Not exact matches

Although article V (1)(d) moves beyond the text of the 1927 Geneva Convention, it is not as liberal as certain arbitration statutes, which attach even less importance than the New York Convention to the law of the country where the arbitration took place at the recognition and enforcement stage.854 As explained in the chapter on article VII, 855 the Convention sets only a «ceiling», or the maximum level of control, which courts of the Contracting States may exert over foreign arbitral awards.

Almost 60 years after its creation, the New York Convention continues to fulfil its objective of facilitating the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, and in the years to come, will guarantee the continued growth of international arbitration and create conditions in which cross-border economic exchanges can flourish.

Pursuant to the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (The New York Convention of 1958), which has been acceded to by 156 countries so far, arbitral awards may be recognised and enforced in these contracting sAwards (The New York Convention of 1958), which has been acceded to by 156 countries so far, arbitral awards may be recognised and enforced in these contracting sawards may be recognised and enforced in these contracting states.

The 1958 Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, which governs the enforcement of arbitral awards worldwide, has been ratified by all EU Member States and will be unaffected by the UK's departure fEnforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, which governs the enforcement of arbitral awards worldwide, has been ratified by all EU Member States and will be unaffected by the UK's departure from tAwards, which governs the enforcement of arbitral awards worldwide, has been ratified by all EU Member States and will be unaffected by the UK's departure fenforcement of arbitral awards worldwide, has been ratified by all EU Member States and will be unaffected by the UK's departure from tawards worldwide, has been ratified by all EU Member States and will be unaffected by the UK's departure from the EU.

The Supreme Court found that security can only be ordered where an application for recognition and enforcement of a foreign arbitral award is being adjourned due to challenges to the award in the courts of the country in, or under the law of which, it was made.

As Lord Mance observed: «Security pending the outcome of foreign proceedings is, in effect, the price of an adjournment which an award debtor is seeking, not to be imposed on an award debtor who is resisting enforcement on properly arguable grounds».

Therefore, the homologation process in Ecuador implies that the party that seeks the enforcement of a foreign award shall file a petition with the Provincial Court8, which will assess whether the award complies with the following requirements: (i) The international award complies with the formalities required for it to be considered authentic in the state where it was issued; (ii) The award is final and binding in the jurisdiction where it was delivered and the attachments are duly legalized; (iii) With regard to the requirement prescribed in the Convention, if the award is in a language other than the official language of the country, in this case Spanish, it shall incorporate a translation; (iv) It is shown from the legal papers of the arbitration proceedings that the party against whom the awards is being enforced was duly notified of the claim and that there was no due process violation; (v) The petition must specify the domicile of the party against whom the award is being enforced.

The exception exists principally because the cross-border recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards is governed by the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (the New York Convention), the priority of which is confirmed in a new Art 73 (2) to the Brussels enforcement of arbitral awards is governed by the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (the New York Convention), the priority of which is confirmed in a new Art 73 (2) to the Brussels I (reawards is governed by the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (the New York Convention), the priority of which is confirmed in a new Art 73 (2) to the Brussels Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (the New York Convention), the priority of which is confirmed in a new Art 73 (2) to the Brussels I (reAwards 1958 (the New York Convention), the priority of which is confirmed in a new Art 73 (2) to the Brussels I (recast).

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).

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.

In Maximov v NMLK the English Commercial Court tackled again the thorny issue of the enforcement of a foreign arbitral award which has been...

Article V of the 1958 Convention of the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the «New York Convention «-RRB- sets out the circumstances in which recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award may Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the «New York Convention «-RRB- sets out the circumstances in which recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award may enforcement of an arbitral award may be refused.

In Maximov v NMLK [1] the English Commercial Court tackled again the thorny issue of the enforcement of a foreign arbitral award which has been set aside by the supervisory courts in the seat of the arbitration.

It is with great pleasure that we bring you the first LEX Africa Guide to the Enforcement of Foreign Money Judgments and Arbitral Awards in Africa which we trust you will find informative and practical.

The term «non-domestic» appears to embrace awards which, although made in the state of enforcement, are treated as «foreign» under its law because of some foreign element in the proceedings, e.g. another State's procedural laws are applied.

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..