{"id":447,"date":"2019-03-27T13:12:48","date_gmt":"2019-03-27T13:12:48","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2019-06-11T10:05:23","modified_gmt":"2019-06-11T10:05:23","slug":"arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php","title":{"rendered":"The Enforcement of Arbitral Awards and Changing Policy"},"content":{"rendered":"

Public policy is still today of significance to any national court that seeks to process arbitral awards. The differences in public policy across international courts is why we see different corporations under contractual agreements seeking mutually beneficial courts to settle arbitrary disputes<\/a>, and why no universal guidelines have been fully explored, this leads to a lack of precision and uncertainty in reaching outcomes. It is evident that more international legal initiatives need to be in place in order to give clarity to public policy defences that hold up loose-ended defences in arbitration cases[1]<\/a>. As well as clarity of public policy use in arbitration cases we should also be aware of being unjust, and the penalties that these interferences have on parties\u2019 development either financially or otherwise[2]<\/a>. It has been argued that due to the differences in public policy across borders as well as its changing nature within any particular nation that strict and precise legal guidelines can never be set to benefit each party in reaching an agreement. <\/p>\n

The 1958 New York Convention aims to recognise the increasing importance of international arbitration<\/a> in settling commercial disputes, as well as provide common legal standards for their recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards. Non-domestic awards are seen to be as such even in cases where an award has been granted in a state of enforcement[3]<\/a>, mainly due to the fact of an element which does not adhere to its proceedings or its justice laws, here we can see that the seated decision\u2019s laws are implemented, which do not adhere to their own (enforcement court\u2019s) ideal of justice. One main indication of the convention is not to discriminate against foreign, non-domestic awards highlighting a key contradiction of the capability of enforcement across borders[4]<\/a>. A further idea of the New York convention is to give each party the ability to action arbitration agreements when either of the agreed is in breach of it, furthermore delivering clarity of the use of public policy as a judicial defence[5]<\/a>. This paper critically discusses the changing nature of public policy across nations in relation to the enforcement of arbitral awards under the 1958 New York Convention in connection to set aside proceedings at the seat of arbitration. <\/p>\n

Understanding
\nthe enforcement of arbitral awards requires us to first consider the prominence
\nof public policy, it contributes common opinions to be found between
\ninternational domains and further to recognise the influences of different
\ninterpretations of public policy and contradictions it creates between
\ndifferent legal systems and in this case arbitral awards, allowing national
\ncourts to acquit a foreign or non-domestic arbitral award merely by finding a
\npublic policy discharge for it[6]<\/a>,
\nwithout real reason. The changes in public policy interpretation across
\ncountries depend on the clarity of the damage of upholding an award, e.g.:
\nproving that awards would damage the public must offer substantiated evidence,
\nhowever this depends on said country\u2019s required ceiling for what is deemed a
\nviolation of public policy, hence leaving a court to decide if a violation to
\npublic policy has been committed this \u201clevel\u201d of damage is what has led to, legislative
\nenforcement becoming a prominent tool and allows an arbitral award to remain
\nunenforced[7]<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Countries
\nthat hold a legal system based on civil law on which society\u2019s moral, political
\nand economic order rests Pertain to public policy as its root, whereas in
\nnations which hold common law as the basis of its legal identity public policy
\nis more narrowly defined as an \u201cabstract set of values\u201d[8]<\/a>.
\nIn the united states, for the award to be in violation of public policy it has
\nto be opposed to the legal system\u2019s \u201cmost basic concept of morality and
\njustice\u201d[9]<\/a>,
\nwhereas in the UK, the clarity of injury has to be absolute in its nature to
\nput the idea forward that not only legal aspects are taken into account. <\/p>\n

In the case of public policy, we must also take
\nrecommendations from cases that allow its application. There are such cases
\nwhere a prevailing standard has been substantive in the implementation of
\npublic policy in arbitral awards cases. The Court of Appeal in DST v Rakoil[10]<\/a>
\napplies a public policy exception to various jurisdictions with the use of a
\ngeneralised approach[11]<\/a>.
\nWhilst implementing the public policy exception there has been some record that
\nenforcing an award would present the idea of \u201cclearly injurious\u201d appropriation
\nbeing committed towards public good, hence present illegality in its
\nenforcement[12]<\/a>. Internationalisation
\nsees the goals of different states converging, meaning that we are also seeing
\nthe same effect on public policy, hence the need for international public
\npolicy and arbitration regulation under a universal standard as a contesting
\npractice. The rules of a particular \u2018public\u201d are based on societal
\nvalues, political and legal concepts, which depend on many different factors.
\nThe vagueness of the public policy concept, which stems from the way it changes
\nin any particular country, has created the need to regulate it internationally.\n<\/p>\n

The
\nNew York Convention 1958 encompasses two basic actions, it looks at recognising
\nand enforcing arbitral awards made in a foreign state, or for the purposes of
\nunderstanding another nation from which the pre-requisite to the award was
\nmade, the application of enforcement here depends upon a particular state\u2019s
\nrules and procedures, in that they must enforce the award in accordance with
\nthose, and recognise the award as binding, however in many cases grounds for
\nrefusal are brought forth to the enforcing court and can be brought to
\nattention by the court itself on the grounds of public policy[13]<\/a>,
\nin other words the decision of approval by the seated court can be adjourned if
\nreasonable grounds for refusal of enforcement are evident in the country of
\norigin\u2019s own law or public policy and that of the enforcing court. The second
\naction is based on the courts referral to arbitration where one or more of the
\nparties has requested it and the arbitrary agreement includes both parties
\nsubmissions of differences that may arise and have arisen, not only this but
\nboth contractual and non-contractual dispute equivalencies (article ii (1)),
\nthat not only look at specific contracts, but also claims in tort and also
\ninvolve the consideration of arbitration clauses that either they must be
\nsigned contractual documents or agreements made in writing in exchanged
\nmessages, (article ii (2)) of the New York Convention 1958 [14]<\/a>.<\/p>\n

When
\nconsidering the changing nature of public policy and indeed the interpretation
\nof the convention it is important to mention that public policy not only
\ndiffers from state to state, but also from international to domestic public
\npolicy, the grounds for refusal concerns in this case the application of public
\npolicy in \u201caudi et alteram partem\u201d or<\/em>
\nthe principles of fair and adverse proceedings. [15]<\/a>
\nThe
\nconstricted interpretation of this comes to light when domestic notions of due
\nprocess are considered above international ones, in this case there can be
\ngrounds to refuse the enforcement of an arbitral award as domestic violation of
\ndue process that pertains to public policy may not be considered so where the
\naward is foreign. <\/p>\n

International
\ndisputes in this case usually fall under public policy fewer times than
\ndomestic ones due to the enforcement court holding less bias towards any
\nparticular party or any specific domestic country\u2019s public policy, but rather a
\nfavourable view on international public policy. Here the application of
\narbitral awards failure could be said to be one negative of the interpretation
\nof domestic v. s. international public policy and should be denied enforcement
\nonly when the asserted public policy \u201cwould violate the forum State\u2019s most
\nbasic notions of morality and justice\u201d[16]<\/a>.  <\/p>\n

Other cases where public policy could be taken into
\naccount under the convention include; impartiality and non-disclosure of
\nreasons. Being impartial at the seat or arbitration is a basic requirement,
\nthis means that under the convention an individual arbitrator shouldn\u2019t have
\nany pre-requisite involvement before the arbitration of a case, if this was to
\ntake place the enforcement court could acquit the arbitral award[17]<\/a>.
\nIt must also be made clear that the initial arbitration must contain reasons
\npertaining to the arbitral decision grounds if not the award simply becomes
\nvoid, however countries that have a common law system, do not particularly have
\nto state reasons for the granting of an award. Internationally, if the awarding
\ncourt is under common law it is general practice to assume that the enforcement
\nin a country where reasons are mandatory would grant the award and the seated
\ncourts decision would be upheld[18]<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Arbitral
\nawards generally refer to an equivalent to a court of law judgement by an
\narbitration tribunal, and does not necessarily refer to monetary gains by
\neither party, but rather and award of value to the claimant, where we see
\nfailure of the claims no fee should be paid by either party. Arbitral awards
\ncan be defined as \u201cany decision of the arbitral tribunal on the substance of a
\ndispute, submitted to it including interim, interlocutory, or partial arbitral
\naward\u201d Cal Code Civ Proc \u00a7
\n1297.21 (a)[19]<\/a>.
\nIn this case it must be noted that the court can at any time bring in new
\nmaterial enhancing its construction in concluding an arbitral award [20]<\/a>. <\/p>\n

Deference in judiciary
\nsystems is currently being gradually weakened by lower courts, in their
\ndecision to prioritize domestic public policy in arbitral awards cases,
\nalthough the awards do not breach any legal regulation or Act, or lead to
\ncontractual misconduct by any party, it causes the \u201clower\u201d enforcement courts
\nin question to engage in judicial activism[21]<\/a>, therefore a substitution
\nof domestic commercial justice is sometimes made, being replaced by the
\nperceived valued justice of the arbitrator. Arbitral awards here have a direct
\nconnection to public policy as they can be greatly impacted by public policy usage
\nto grant or deny an arbitral award, depending on the interpretation of public policy
\nat the seated court and enforcement court as well as in a set aside judgments.<\/p>\n

The decision making process becomes extremely complex whilst
\ncoming to an agreement, the court enforcing the decision should have
\nunderstanding of their extent of concession to the decision of the seat. As a
\ngeneral rule of thumb it has been considered that it would be inappropriate for
\nthe enforcement court to undermine the decision made at the seat[22]<\/a>. Where
\nthere is international arbitration the seat\u2019s role must also be considered, for
\ninstance US courts would usually concede to decisions made by the judicial
\ncourt that holds the seat, whereas the French approach would be to ignore these
\ndecisions, which would not be the correct proceeding under the Convention 1958,
\nunless circumstances arise where the decision is made with evidence made only
\nin part by the seat, considered as \u201cexceptional circumstances\u201d, or if the
\nnations principles of justice are undermined, with this in mind the violation
\nof public policy must also be taken into account, with proper use of the word
\njustice[23]<\/a>. Theories
\nthat are relative to the importance of the seat are also in dispute with each other
\nsuch as duty vs. discretion.<\/p>\n

The different interpretations of the role of the seat and its importance in different states causes strain on its relationship with the enforcement court, this happens precisely when the enforcement court is asked to reach an outcome on enforcing an award that has been set aside at the seat. Nikolay Viktorovich Maximov v Open Joint Stock Company [2017] EWHC 1911 (Comm)<\/a>[24]<\/a> serves a reminder that the defense of a annulment based on non-disclosures of public policy and therefore the arbitrability of offences raised at the seat can be upheld after an award has been granted and then deferred based on evidence not being raised during the set aside hearing, this was done so under proceedings at the seat set forth by the enforcing court under the New York Convention 1958[25]<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Later there is
\na sought enforcement of an award in three different states, this is why there
\nis need for international
\nlegal initiatives to set tangible guidelines for public policy as it will stop
\nlarger parties seeking settlement in favourable enforcement courts as this case
\nsaw from Paris, their judicial system allows many limitations for the
\nenforcement of an arbitral award, this could also be based on the consent of
\nboth parties[26]<\/a>,
\nthe Paris court of appeal overruled the defendants claims that there was a
\nfailure of disclosures[27]<\/a>
\nand the setting aside of the arbitration was not an excuse for annulling an
\naward. <\/p>\n

Enforcement
\nwas also sought from The Amsterdam District court, determining that the
\nannulment decision could only be overturned if there was reasonable grounds to
\nassume that the set aside judgement from the enforcement court would violate
\ntheir own public policy, as they were not satisfied that there were exceptional
\ncircumstances they would uphold the annulled decision, after an appeal was
\nlaunched, following this experts were then involved to give evidence relative
\nto the fairness of the proceedings
\nthat were set aside by the Russian proceedings, the court still decided that
\nthe original annulled decision should remain as there was not sufficient
\nevidence to uphold the notion of an unfair trial, not only this but the
\nconsequences of the \u201cunfairness\u201d would make the pre-existing arbitral contract moot[28]<\/a>,
\nor that the decision would damage their public policy and the decisions were
\nnot partial and dependent and were simply a provision of justice. <\/p>\n

Further to the
\nprevious sought enforcements another action was brought to London where no
\nconclusion was reached, firstly on the basis of bias in proceedings of the set
\naside award there was no evidence to suggest that these were unfair or that the
\nmanner of delivery was pre-obstinate and the rationality for this being pursued
\nwas incoherent, after this the grounds for setting the award aside were
\nexamined. The grounds of non-disclosure at the set aside hearing were
\nun-surmountable in that an unsupportable conclusion was made rather than making
\na rational decision, however the public policy ground was found to be favorable
\nfor the defendant as it is arguable by the standards of the seated court. The finding
\nof non-arbitrary nature of the offences was found to be courageous although not
\nunsupported in evidence. <\/p>\n

In many cases,
\nclaimants looking to have arbitral awards enforced that have already been set
\naside at the seat can be nullified under the grounds of public policy, due to it\u2019s
\nchanging nature and national differences, including sanctioned states of the
\nConvention. In retrospect this could be overturned by commercial courts,
\nhowever they are likely to come to the same verdict, so not to undermine public
\npolicy in
\nparticular countries, unless proceedings were shown to be bias in the annulment
\nof the set aside judgement. The approaches of different national courts, as
\nwell as the enforcement of awards in different cases were updated. Domestic and
\ninternational public policy has not been taken into account shows that there is
\na lack in conforming to its international use, it undermines domestic capabilities
\nof public policy[29]<\/a>
\nand infers the misappropriation of courts from seated to set aside through to
\nenforced judgements based on domestic principles, yet more reason parties
\nshould choose their seat of arbitration carefully[30]<\/a>.
\nThe main objectives of different jurisdictions entirely separate, this would
\nimply that although we can see the generalisation and globalisation of some
\nvalues in the \u201cworld public\u201d, simply different political, economical and
\nsocietal values differ too much for public policy and arbitral awards to be
\nregulated internationally, although there is a need for it due to the use of
\nthis exception to escape making difficult decisions [31]<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Overall the significance of the changing nature of public policy in International arbitration has become more relevant, as the changing nature of social values has blended between international borders as well as different jurisdictions within any particular state, and so it\u2019s forthcoming for international regulation of arbitral awards[32]<\/a>. Under the New York Convention (1958) there have been several national jurisdictions that have tried to adhere to governed mutual international regulation, however under the rule of the convention there have been many instances where corporations have used public policy as an escape route in arbitral award enforcement. There is great reason to believe that due to national court\u2019s bias there can\u2019t be a fair trial and proceedings would be skewed towards a particular party, hence the need for mutual courts where impartiality is sought. The need for clarity of public policy is evident here as precision of definitive legal certainty leads to defences being saturated for no particular reason. The seated party can also set aside the judgement, based on the public policy clause, further to this it merits that in doing this they are avoiding making difficult judgements, and referring them to expert evidences and the final judgement to be made by enforcing courts which in general have some bias based on their own legal system. Simply put we must see the emergence or arbitrary guidelines that deal with the clarity of public policy internationally, in order to gain a more just decision by the seat and by the enforcement court, however it seems that this can not for the time being go ahead due to the nature of individual set societal values, political stances and economic reasons between international borders and the differing and changing nature of public policy. <\/p>\n

Bibliography<\/h2>\n

Books <\/h3>\n

Bantekas,
\nI. An Introduction to International Arbitration, <\/em>Cambridge University
\nPress, (2015), 259-260.<\/p>\n

Born, G. B. Disclosure
\nand evidence taking in international arbitration in, International Arbitration:
\nLaw and Practice, <\/em>Kluwer Law International,
\n(2015), 177.<\/p>\n

Born,
\nG. B. International Commercial
\nArbitration 5th<\/sup> edition<\/em>, (2009) Ch. 3 and 4, N. Blackaby, C.
\nPartasides, A. Redfern M. Hunter, Redfern and Hunter on International
\nArbitration, 116.<\/p>\n

Margaret, L. Moses, The principles and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration, <\/em>Cambridge
\nUniversity Press, (2008) 18.<\/p>\n

Margaret, L. Moses, The Principles and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration,<\/em>
\nCambridge University Press, (2008), 234.<\/p>\n

Margaret, L. Moses, The
\nPrinciples and Practice of International Commercial Arbitration <\/em>3rd<\/sup>
\nedition, <\/em>Cambridge University Press, (2017) 244- 247<\/p>\n

Journal Articles <\/h3>\n

Barry,
\nM. \u2018The Role of the Seat in International Arbitration: Theory, Practice, and Implications
\nfor Australian Courts\u2019 (2015) 32 (3) JIA 289.<\/p>\n

Barry, M. \u2018The Role of the Seat in International Arbitration:
\nTheory, Practice, and Implications for Australian Courts\u2019 (2015) 32 (3) JIA
\n310.<\/p>\n

Bermann, G. A. \u2018Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards: The Interpretation and Application of the New York Convention by National Courts\u2019 (2017) GSLC 23.<\/p>\n

Buchanan, M.A. \u2018Public policy And International commercial arbitration\u2019 (1988) ABLJ 26.<\/p>\n

B\u00fchring-Uhle, C. Kirchhoff, L. and Scherer, G. \u2018Arbitration and mediation in international
\nbusiness\u2019 (2006)<\/em> Kluwer Law International 26.<\/p>\n

Burley, A. M. S. \u2018International law and international
\nrelations theory: a dual agenda\u2019 (1993) 87<\/em>(2) AJIL<\/em> 205.<\/p>\n

Das R. and Keyal A. \u2018Judicial Intervention in International Arbitration\u2019 2(4) (2009) NUJS 585.<\/p>\n

Donaldson, T. and Dunfee, T. W. \u2018Toward a unified conception of business ethics: Integrative social contracts theory\u2019 (1994) 19<\/em>(2) AMR 252-284.<\/p>\n

Edwards H. T. \u2018Judicial review of Labour Arbitration Awards: The clash Between the Public Policy Exception and The Duty to Bargain\u2019 (1988) CKLR 64.<\/p>\n

Gal
\nR. \u2018Enforcing awards that have been set aside at
\nthe seat: the English and Dutch courts remind parties of the high hurdle that
\nmust be overcome\u2019 (2017) PLAB 10.<\/p>\n

Lai H. H. \u2018Enforcement of
\nForeign Arbitral Award: Re An Arbitration Between Hainan Machinery Import and
\nExport Corporation and Donald & McCarthy Pte Ltd\u2019 SJLS<\/em> (1996)
\n241.<\/p>\n

Lascoumes, P. and Gales, P. L. \u2018Understanding Public Policy through Its Instruments: From the Nature of Instruments to the Sociology of Public Policy Instrumentation\u2019 (2007) 20(1) IJPAI 1-21. <\/p>\n

Paulsson, J. \u2018Arbitration unbound: Award Detached from the Law of its
\nCountry of Origin\u2019 (1981) 30<\/em>(2) ICLQ 358.<\/p>\n

Quigley, L. V. \u2018Accession by the United States to
\nthe United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign
\nArbitral Awards\u2019 (1961) 70 (7) 1049.<\/p>\n

Sameer, S. \u2018Enforcement of Arbitral Awards and Public
\nPolicy Same Concept Different Approach\u2019 (2011) TDM 8.5.<\/p>\n

Shtromberg,
\nA, \u2018Substantive Public Policy Concept
\nin Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards in Russia\u2019 (2017) HELDA 26 <\/p>\n

Straus,
\n\u2018Arbitration of Disputes Between Multinational Corporations, in New Strategies
\nfor Peaceful Resolution of International Business Disputes\u2019 (1971) 109 AAA 114.\n<\/p>\n

Strub, M. ‘Resisting Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral
\nAwards under Article 1(e) and Article VI of the New York Convention: A Proposal
\nfor Effective Guidelines\u2019 (1990), 68(5) 1031.<\/p>\n

Sunstein, C. R. \u2018Standing and the privatization of public law\u2019 (1988) 88<\/em>(7)
\nCLR<\/em> 1432.<\/p>\n

Van den Berg, A. \u2018The New York
\nArbitration Convention of 1958: towards a uniform judicial interpretation\u2019
\n(1994) Kluwer. T.M.C .<\/p>\n

Case Law <\/h3>\n

Cal Code Civ Proc \u00a7 1297.21 (a), (Definition of
\nArbitral awards).<\/p>\n

Deutsche-und Tiefbohgeseltshaft v.s. Ras Al Khaimah
\nNational oil Co. and Shell International Petroleum Co. Ltd (DST v.s. Rakoil),
\n(1987) 3 WLR 1023 UKHL. <\/p>\n

CL-2014-337 CL- 2014-658, Nikolay Viktorovich Maximov v Open Joint Stock
\nCompany [2017] EWHC 1911 (Comm).<\/p>\n

Parsons & Whittemore v. RAKTA,
\nUS (USCA) no. 7, reported in Yearbook 1 (205). <\/p>\n

Treaties<\/h3>\n

UN
\nNew York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral
\nAwards (1958)<\/p>\n

Ibid:
\nUN New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral
\nAwards, (1958). <\/p>\n

\n

[1]<\/a> Pierre
\nLascoumes, Patrick Le Gales, Understanding Public Policy through Its Instruments:
\nFrom the Nature of Instruments to the Sociology of Public Policy
\nInstrumentation, (2007) 20(1) IJPAI 1-21. <\/p>\n

[2]<\/a> Margaret L. Moses, The principles and practice of international commercial arbitration <\/em>3rd<\/sup> edition, (2017) 244- 247<\/p>\n

[3]<\/a> UN New
\nYork Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards,
\n(1958)<\/p>\n

[4]<\/a> Leonard
\nV. Quigley, Accession by the United States
\nto the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign
\nArbitral Awards, (1961), 70 (7) 1049.<\/p>\n

[5]<\/a> M.A. Buchanan Public policy And
\nInternational commercial arbitration (1988) ABLJ, 26.<\/p>\n

[6]<\/a> Harry
\nT. Edwards, \u2018Judicial review of Labour Arbitration Awards: The clash Between
\nthe Public Policy Exception and The Duty to Bargain\u2019 (1988) CKLR 64.<\/p>\n

[7]<\/a> Sattar Sameer, \u2018Enforcement of Arbitral
\nAwards and Public Policy Same Concept Different Approach\u2019 (2011) 8.5 TDM <\/p>\n

[8]<\/a> Anne-Marie-Slaughter Burley,
\n\u2018International law and international relations theory: a dual agenda\u2019 (1993) 87<\/em>(2)
\nAJIL<\/em>, 205.<\/p>\n

[9]<\/a> Thomas Donaldson, Thomas W. Dunfee,
\n\u2018Toward a unified conception of business ethics: Integrative social contracts
\ntheory\u2019 (1994) 19<\/em>(2) AMR 252-284.<\/p>\n

[10]<\/a> Deutsche-und Tiefbohgeseltshaft v.s. Ras Al Khaimah
\nNational oil Co. and Shell International Petroleum Co. Ltd (DST v.s. Rakoil),
\n(1987) 3 WLR 1023 UKHL. <\/p>\n

[11]<\/a> Ho Hock Lai \u2018Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Award: Re An Arbitration Between Hainan
\nMachinery Import and Export Corporation and Donald & McCarthy Pte Ltd\u2019
\nSJLS<\/em> (1996) 241.<\/p>\n

[12]<\/a>Cass R. Sunstein, \u2018Standing and the
\nprivatization of public law\u2019 (1988) 88<\/em>(7), CLR<\/em> 1432.<\/p>\n

[13]<\/a> Albert
\nVan den Berg, \u2018The New York
\nArbitration Convention of 1958: towards a uniform judicial interpretation\u2019
\n(Kluwer 1994) T.M.C. <\/p>\n

[14]<\/a> UN New York Convention on
\nthe Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958)<\/p>\n

[15]<\/a> Parsons & Whittemore v. RAKTA, US
\n(USCA) no. 7, reported in Yearbook 1 (205). <\/p>\n

[16]<\/a> Christian
\nB\u00fchring-Uhle, Lars Kirchhoff and Gabriele Scherer, \u2018Arbitration and mediation in international business\u2019 (2006)<\/em>
\nKLI 26.<\/p>\n

[17]<\/a> Rukmini Das and Anisha Keyal, \u2018Judicial
\nIntervention in International Arbitration\u2019 (2009), 2(4) NUJS, 585.<\/p>\n

[18]<\/a> Michael Strub, ‘Resisting Enforcement of
\nForeign Arbitral Awards under Article 1(e) and Article VI of the New York <\/p>\n

Convention: A Proposal
\nfor Effective Guidelines\u2019 (1990) 68(5) NYC 1031.<\/p>\n

[19]<\/a> Cal Code Civ Proc \u00a7 1297.21 (a), (Definition
\nof Arbitral awards).<\/p>\n

[20]<\/a> Jan Paulsson, \u2018Arbitration unbound:
\nAward Detached from the Law of its Country of Origin\u2019 (1981) 30<\/em>(2) ICLQ
\n358.<\/p>\n

[21]<\/a> George A. Bermann, \u2018Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign
\nArbitral Awards: The Interpretation and Application of the New York Convention
\nby National Courts\u2019 (2017) GSLC 23.<\/p>\n

[22]<\/a> Matthew
\nBarry, \u2018The Role of the Seat in International Arbitration: Theory, Practice,
\nand Implications for Australian Courts\u2019 (2015) 32 (3) JIA 289.<\/p>\n

[23]<\/a> Matthew Barry, \u2018The Role of the Seat in International
\nArbitration: Theory, Practice, and Implications for Australian Courts\u2019 (2015)
\n32 (3) JIA 310.<\/p>\n

[24]<\/a> CL-2014-337 CL- 2014-658, Nikolay Viktorovich Maximov v Open Joint Stock
\nCompany [2017] EWHC 1911 (Comm).<\/p>\n

[25]<\/a> Alexandra
\nShtromberg, \u2018Substantive Public Policy
\nConcept in Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards in Russia\u2019 (2017) HELDA 26 <\/p>\n

[26]<\/a>
\nMargaret, l. Moses, The principles and practice of International
\nCommercial arbitration,<\/em> (2008) 18.<\/p>\n

[27]<\/a> Gary B. Born, Disclosure and evidence taking in international arbitration in, International Arbitration: Law and Practice<\/em>, 177.<\/p>\n

[28]<\/a> Ilias
\nBantekas, An Introduction to International Arbitration, <\/em>Cambridge
\nUniversity Press, (2015), 259-260.<\/p>\n

[29]<\/a>
\nMargaret. L. Moses, The Principles and Practice of International
\nCommercial Arbitration, <\/em>Cambridge University Press, (2008), 234.<\/p>\n

[30]<\/a>
\nRick Gal, \u2018Enforcing awards that have been set aside at
\nthe seat: the English and Dutch courts remind parties of the high hurdle that
\nmust be overcome\u2019 (2017) PLAB 10. <\/p>\n

[31]<\/a> Straus,
\n\u2018Arbitration of Disputes Between Multinational Corporations, in New Strategies
\nfor Peaceful Resolution of International Business Disputes\u2019 (1971) 109 AAA 114.\n<\/p>\n

[32]<\/a>Gary. B.
\nBorn, International Commercial
\nArbitration 5th<\/sup> edition<\/em>, (2009) Ch. 3 and 4, Nigel Blackaby,
\nConstantine Partasides, Alan Redfern, Martin Hunter, Redfern and Hunter on
\nInternational Arbitration, 116.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This paper critically discusses the changing nature of public policy across nations in relation to the enforcement of arbitral awards.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[51],"tags":[86,85],"class_list":["post-447","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-free-law-essaysarbitration-law","tag-int-law","tag-uk-law"],"yoast_head":"\nThe Enforcement of Arbitral Awards and Changing Policy | LawTeacher.net<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"This paper critically discusses the changing nature of public policy across nations in relation to the enforcement of arbitral awards.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_GB\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Enforcement of Arbitral Awards and Changing Policy\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"This paper critically discusses the changing nature of public policy across nations in relation to the enforcement of arbitral awards.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"LawTeacher.net\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-large-logo.webp\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1920\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1080\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/webp\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"LawTeacher\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@LawTeacherNet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@LawTeacherNet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"LawTeacher\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Estimated reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"20 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"ScholarlyArticle\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"LawTeacher\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/b99962c073c877c4ab8ee3d2486cd56e\"},\"headline\":\"The Enforcement of Arbitral Awards and Changing Policy\",\"datePublished\":\"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php\"},\"wordCount\":3976,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"International Law\",\"UK Law\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Arbitration Law\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php\",\"url\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php\",\"name\":\"The Enforcement of Arbitral Awards and Changing Policy | LawTeacher.net\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00\",\"description\":\"This paper critically discusses the changing nature of public policy across nations in relation to the enforcement of arbitral awards.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Enforcement of Arbitral Awards and Changing Policy\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/\",\"name\":\"Law Teacher\",\"description\":\"The Law Essay Professionals\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"LawTeacher.net\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Law Teacher\",\"alternateName\":\"LawTeacher.net\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-logo.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-logo.jpg\",\"width\":250,\"height\":250,\"caption\":\"Law Teacher\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/LawTeacherNet\",\"https:\/\/api.whatsapp.com\/send\/?phone=447723491966&text&type=phone_number&app_absent=0\"],\"description\":\"Law Teacher provides academic writing services for law students throughout the world.\",\"email\":\"contact@lawteacher.net\",\"telephone\":\"+44 115 966 7966\",\"numberOfEmployees\":{\"@type\":\"QuantitativeValue\",\"minValue\":\"51\",\"maxValue\":\"200\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/b99962c073c877c4ab8ee3d2486cd56e\",\"name\":\"LawTeacher\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4fdfab0a9ef25209f111018ecc8a983e19e57c5066a9277217a119582ccbeed3?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4fdfab0a9ef25209f111018ecc8a983e19e57c5066a9277217a119582ccbeed3?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"LawTeacher\"},\"description\":\"LawTeacher.net is the UK's leading provider of academic legal support, offering both writing services and an extensive collection of law study resources for students in the UK and overseas. Founded in 2003 by Grey's Inn graduate Barclay Littlewood, the Company was built on a commitment to excellence, with unique guarantees and a high standard of service from day one. The team includes over 500 UK legally qualified writing experts, with many practising solicitors and barristers, and several former lecturers.\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\",\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/LawTeacherNet\",\"https:\/\/gravatar.com\/lawteacherprofile\"],\"knowsAbout\":[\"Contract Law\",\"Criminal Law\",\"Constitutional and Administrative Law\",\"EU Law\",\"Tort Law\",\"Property Law\",\"Equity and Trusts\",\"Jurisprudence\",\"Company Law\",\"Commercial Law\",\"Family Law\",\"Human Rights Law\",\"Employment Law\",\"Evidence\",\"Public International Law\",\"Legal Research and Methods\",\"Dispute Resolution\",\"Business Law and Practice\",\"Civil Litigation\",\"Criminal Litigation\",\"Professional Conduct\",\"Taxation\",\"Wills and Administration of Estates\",\"Solicitors\u2019 Accounts\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/author\/lawteacher\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The Enforcement of Arbitral Awards and Changing Policy | LawTeacher.net","description":"This paper critically discusses the changing nature of public policy across nations in relation to the enforcement of arbitral awards.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php","og_locale":"en_GB","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Enforcement of Arbitral Awards and Changing Policy","og_description":"This paper critically discusses the changing nature of public policy across nations in relation to the enforcement of arbitral awards.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php","og_site_name":"LawTeacher.net","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\/","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet","article_published_time":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1920,"height":1080,"url":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-large-logo.webp","type":"image\/webp"}],"author":"LawTeacher","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@LawTeacherNet","twitter_site":"@LawTeacherNet","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"LawTeacher","Estimated reading time":"20 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"ScholarlyArticle","@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php"},"author":{"name":"LawTeacher","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/b99962c073c877c4ab8ee3d2486cd56e"},"headline":"The Enforcement of Arbitral Awards and Changing Policy","datePublished":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php"},"wordCount":3976,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization"},"keywords":["International Law","UK Law"],"articleSection":["Arbitration Law"],"inLanguage":"en-GB"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php","url":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php","name":"The Enforcement of Arbitral Awards and Changing Policy | LawTeacher.net","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#website"},"datePublished":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00+00:00","description":"This paper critically discusses the changing nature of public policy across nations in relation to the enforcement of arbitral awards.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-GB","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"http:\/\/64.226.118.242:8001\/free-law-essays\/arbitration-law\/arbitral-awards-changing-policy-3453.php#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Enforcement of Arbitral Awards and Changing Policy"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#website","url":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/","name":"Law Teacher","description":"The Law Essay Professionals","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization"},"alternateName":"LawTeacher.net","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-GB"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#organization","name":"Law Teacher","alternateName":"LawTeacher.net","url":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-logo.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/LT-logo.jpg","width":250,"height":250,"caption":"Law Teacher"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet\/","https:\/\/x.com\/LawTeacherNet","https:\/\/api.whatsapp.com\/send\/?phone=447723491966&text&type=phone_number&app_absent=0"],"description":"Law Teacher provides academic writing services for law students throughout the world.","email":"contact@lawteacher.net","telephone":"+44 115 966 7966","numberOfEmployees":{"@type":"QuantitativeValue","minValue":"51","maxValue":"200"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/b99962c073c877c4ab8ee3d2486cd56e","name":"LawTeacher","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/wp.lawteacher.net\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4fdfab0a9ef25209f111018ecc8a983e19e57c5066a9277217a119582ccbeed3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4fdfab0a9ef25209f111018ecc8a983e19e57c5066a9277217a119582ccbeed3?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"LawTeacher"},"description":"LawTeacher.net is the UK's leading provider of academic legal support, offering both writing services and an extensive collection of law study resources for students in the UK and overseas. Founded in 2003 by Grey's Inn graduate Barclay Littlewood, the Company was built on a commitment to excellence, with unique guarantees and a high standard of service from day one. The team includes over 500 UK legally qualified writing experts, with many practising solicitors and barristers, and several former lecturers.","sameAs":["https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawTeacherNet","https:\/\/x.com\/LawTeacherNet","https:\/\/gravatar.com\/lawteacherprofile"],"knowsAbout":["Contract Law","Criminal Law","Constitutional and Administrative Law","EU Law","Tort Law","Property Law","Equity and Trusts","Jurisprudence","Company Law","Commercial Law","Family Law","Human Rights Law","Employment Law","Evidence","Public International Law","Legal Research and Methods","Dispute Resolution","Business Law and Practice","Civil Litigation","Criminal Litigation","Professional Conduct","Taxation","Wills and Administration of Estates","Solicitors\u2019 Accounts"],"url":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/author\/lawteacher"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/447","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=447"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/447\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=447"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=447"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lawteacher.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=447"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}