Education, Science, Technology, Innovation and Life
Open Access
Sign In

Analysis on Cases Denying Chinese Awards: From the Perspective of International Public Policy

Download as PDF

DOI: 10.23977/law.2024.030601 | Downloads: 22 | Views: 640

Author(s)

Lanyue Xu 1

Affiliation(s)

1 School of Law, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, Jiangsu, 225127, China

Corresponding Author

Lanyue Xu

ABSTRACT

The denial of awards made by Chinese arbitration institutions by other contracting states’ courts reflects the adaptability of Chinese arbitral awards within the contracting states of the New York Convention. There are two main reasons for such denials: the validity of the arbitration agreement and violations of the principle of natural justice. Issues related to the validity of arbitration agreements are the primary reasons for denial. Overall, the denial of enforcement cannot be imputed to Chinese arbitration institutions. The incomplete implementation of international public policy principles by the courts of contracting states is also a significant factor causing repeated reviews of Chinese awards on the issues of arbitration agreement validity and procedural justice. Chinese arbitration institutions should emphasize the examination of arbitration agreement validity and the reasoning for arbitration jurisdiction, fully implement the agreement of the disputing parties, and actively create space for contracting states’ courts to apply international public policy principles.

KEYWORDS

International public policy, res judicata, recognition of international commercial awards, arbitration agreement validity

CITE THIS PAPER

Lanyue Xu. Analysis on Cases Denying Chinese Awards: From the Perspective of International Public Policy. Science of Law Journal (2024) Vol. 3: 1-7. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/DOI: 10.23977/law.2024.030601.

REFERENCES

[1] Committee on International Commercial Arbitration, International Law Association Reports of Conferences 69 (2000): pp. 340-387
[2] Van den Berg, Distinction Domestic-International public policy in New York Convention Consolidated Commentary cases. In 1996 XXI ICCA Yearbook 502.
[3] Beatson, Jack: International Arbitration, Public Policy Considerations, and Conflicts of Law: The Perspectives of Reviewing and Enforcing Courts, Arbitration International, 2017, 33, pp. 175-196.
[4] Gary B. Born, International Commercial Arbitration (Third Edition), Volume I, (The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International B.V, 2021), pp. 3796-3800
[5] See Parsons and Whittemore Overseas Co. Inc v Societe General de Industrie du Papier (Rakta) (1974) 508 F. 2d 969 at 974 
[6] Pierre Mayer and Audley William Sheppard, 'Final ILA Report on Public Policy as a Bar to Enforcement of International Arbitral Awards', in William W. Park (ed), Arbitration International, (© The Author(s); Oxford University Press 2003, Volume 19 Issue 2) pp. 249 - 263
[7] See United Nations Commission on International Trade Law Arbitration Rules, 1984.
[8] See Changzhou Amec Eastern Tools and Equipment Co., Ltd v. Eastern Tools & Equipment, Inc. et al. and Xuchu Dai, as the Bankruptcy Administrator for Changzhou AMEC Eastern Tools and Equipment Co., Ltd. v. Eastern Tools & Equipment, Inc, 2006.
[9] See Sinocore International Co Ltd v. RBRG Trading (UK) Ltd, Hight Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, 17 February 2017.
[10] Pierre Mayer and Audley William Sheppard, 'Final ILA Report on Public Policy as a Bar to Enforcement of International Arbitral Awards', in William W. Park (ed), Arbitration International, (© The Author(s); Oxford University Press 2003, Volume 19 Issue 2) pp. 249 - 263. p260.
[11] See Hebei Import & Export Corp. v. Polytek Engineering Co. Ltd, See also Xiamen Xinjingdi Group Ltd v. Eton Properties Limited, et al. See British case Minmetals Germany GmbH v. Ferco Steel Ltd, 2008
[12] See Jiangsu Beier Decoration Materials Co., Ltd. v. Angle World LLC, United States Court of Appeals, Third, 2009.
[13] Xiao, Yongping, Liao Zhuowei. The Recognition and Enforcement of Annulled Arbitral Awards in USA. Business and Economic Law Review. 2019, (02): 49-59.
[14] Article 9 of the "Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on the Service of Civil Litigation Documents by Special Court Mail", 2005. 

All published work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2016 - 2031 Clausius Scientific Press Inc. All Rights Reserved.