An Analysis of the Legal Framework and its Interpretation in Case Law and Literature
F. Recommendations 165
165 F. Recommendations In light of the obvious gaps of the current interaction of international regimes it has often been criticised and suggested for revision. 601 The latest added multilat- eral act was the Brussels I Regulation, but lacking essential impact on matters of arbitration, this Regulation was not capable of reaching a legislative improvement, consis tent interpretation or uniform conception to the open issues. There is still disunity on internationally acknowledged grounds for nullifi cation of awards or uniform standards on the exercise of discretionary power on enforcement deci- sions. Not only do the parties principally expect their award to be fi nal, such fi nal- ity is also essential for maintaining and promoting international arbitration as a feasible instrument to settle disputes in international business matters. 602 Besides, “[p]articipants in international transactions should play according to the same rules.” 603 These “rules” however, need to balance the tension between the parties’ equal interest in the fi nality and the fairness of the issued award. I. Recommendations De Lege Ferenda The controversial and intensely debated decisions in favour of enforcement of vacated awards basically emerged, because not only courts (and laws) of the forum state, but also courts (and laws) of the enforcing state are equally permitted to determine the validity of arbitral awards. 604 Therefore, it is of vital importance to defi ne the interaction of forum states and enforcing states when assessing the legal effectiveness of arbitral awards. 601 Freyer/Gharavi (1998), op. cit., 113; Webster (2006)...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.