As the title suggests, this article focuses on choice-of-law problems surrounding domestic parties who chose international law to govern their disputes. This phenomenon is becoming more and more common and is creating a great deal of confusion in many sectors of the legal community. At the same time, legislation to deal with the issue has not kept pace. This article discusses the problem, its eccentricities, and how several different attempts have been made to deal with the problem. It also looks at an illustrative case, Grecon v. Horner, from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, in order to illustrate the problem and the results-oriented approach that I advocate.
Mauricio Gomm Santos Sr. & Smith II, Addressing the New York Convention's Latest Challenge: Enforcing Annulled Foreign Awards
Abstract:
After the case of TermoRio v. Electranta, it appears that American courts have a stronger direction regarding the enforcement of arbitral awards annulled in the country of origin. The TermoRio court decided that it could not enforce in the United States an arbitral award annulled in the country of origin unless there are extraordinary circumstances or evidence of fraud. For parties seeking to enforce annulled awards, TermoRio will be an obstacle. But there still may be various avenues for enforcing annulled awards, and this article analyzes some of them.
[The decision which the authors referred to can be found here]
No comments:
Post a Comment