Publication Type
Journal Article
Version
acceptedVersion
Publication Date
10-2020
Abstract
The remedies that award debtors have under Articles 16(3), 34 and 36 of the Model Law, and more critically the inter-relationship between those remedies, has attracted much debate. Yet there is a dearth of analysis on how the availability of each remedy may differ according to the award debtor’s degree of participation in the arbitral pro- cess. Such analysis carries significant practical value for parties in considering whether and to what extent they should participate in any arbitral process when they harbour jurisdictional objections. This article distils Singapore’s experience, describing how Singapore has implemented the ‘choice of remedies’ principle for participating, non- participating, and boycotting respondents with jurisdictional objections, with compara- tive observations from Hong Kong, England, and New Zealand. This article shows that the ultimate matrix of remedies chosen by Singapore is far from straightforward. The question whether a respondent has participated in the arbitral process is also a vexed one. The analysis in this article begs the question whether in pursuit of harmonization future reforms to the Model Law ought to be considered.
Discipline
Dispute Resolution and Arbitration | International Trade Law
Research Areas
Dispute Resolution; Asian and Comparative Legal Systems
Publication
Arbitration International
Volume
36
Issue
4
First Page
529
Last Page
556
ISSN
0957-0411
Identifier
10.1093/arbint/aiaa029
Publisher
Oxford Academic
Citation
CHAN, Darius and NEOH, Claire.
To boycott proceedings or not? Recourse against arbitral awards on jurisdictional grounds by different categories of respondents under the Model Law. (2020). Arbitration International. 36, (4), 529-556.
Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/3201
Copyright Owner and License
Authors
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 International License.
Additional URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/arbint/aiaa029