Separability of or Overlap between Public Policy and Procedural Grounds for Refusal of Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards under the New York Convention
Author(s) -
Magdalena Inglot
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
polish review of international and european law
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2544-7432
pISSN - 2299-2170
DOI - 10.21697/priel.2015.4.1.02
Subject(s) - enforcement , convention , law , political science , law and economics , sociology
“Indeed, public policy in international commercial arbitration is a double-edged sword: helpful as a tool, dangerous as a weapon.”1 Public policy is the most frequently invoked grounds for refusal of enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. It should only be used in exceptional cases “as a shield to the enforcement of foreign awards which bear unwanted solutions.”2 However, being a non-defined term, left to a subjective assessment of a court, public policy might also be a weapon, invoked as an excuse not to enforce arbitral awards. The list of grounds for refusal of recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards pursuant to the New York Convention on the
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom