Why Egregious Errors of Law May yet justify a refusal of enforcement under the 'New York Convention'
Publication Type
Journal Article
Version
publishedVersion
Publication Date
12-2009
Abstract
Parties on the losing side in international arbitration have long argued that an error of law is a defence to the enforcement of foreign awards. Citing article V(2)(b) of the New York Convention, such parties have argued that a manifest error of law is a violation of public policy. While national courts have generally paid little heed to this line of argument, this article seeks to raise the possibility that there may yet be the exceedingly rare instance in which a court should preclude enforcing an award marred by a hideous error of law. Limited review of an arbitrator's application of the law in international arbitrations should exist where enforcing the award would be contrary to the forum's most basic notions of justice. By way of case law, natural justice and general principles of arbitral law, this article argues that if indeed such egregious awards arise, they should be denied enforcement under the Convention.
Discipline
Dispute Resolution and Arbitration | International Law
Publication
Singapore Journal of Legal Studies
First Page
592
Last Page
617
ISSN
0218-2173
Publisher
National University of Singapore
Citation
TI, Seng Wei, Edward.
Why Egregious Errors of Law May yet justify a refusal of enforcement under the 'New York Convention'. (2009). Singapore Journal of Legal Studies. 592-617.
Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/2209
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 International License.
Additional URL
http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/sjls2009&div=32&id=&page=