1 Introduction The purpose of this paper is to illustrate the crucial role the Dubai International Financial Centre has embraced as “host jurisdiction” in relation to the recognition and the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in the United Arab Emirates. Part 1 provides a general overview on the UAE legal setting and a brief analysis of how arbitration fits in such a framework. The following section deals with the complexities and the issues that parties have been encountering when seeking enforcement of foreign awards before UAE courts – but the same considerations apply to several other Middle Eastern countries – and that therefore have contributed to creating a general suspicion towards arbitration as a means for dispute resolution …show more content…
1.2 How does arbitration fit in? Arbitration is not inconsistent with Shari’a law: in fact, it has been practiced in the Middle East, in pre-Islamic times – even in a form closer to mediation or conciliation – and is specifically endorsed by the Quran. Despite its ancient roots, however, foreign counterparties have often shown profound reluctance and suspicion towards Middle-Eastern arbitration system, due to the lack of a common or federal legislative framework to support arbitration; moreover, the vital role –even if to different degrees- Islamic faith plays in the interpretation of the law in many jurisdictions within the Middle East represents a “religious variable” that has both substantive and procedural ramifications. Nevertheless, over the last years convincing strides towards cementing their reputation as robust jurisdictions in which parties can effectively resolve their commercial disagreements have been made. Such recent interest in arbitration as an alternative means of dispute resolution is clearly intertwined with the ever-increasing geopolitical, commercial and financial significance the region has gained. Just think about the fact that UAE successfully proposed itself as host of Expo 2020, which is going to take place in
Disputes between individuals can be resolved through mediation, tribunals and courts are sought depending on the complexity and nature of the dispute. Their effectiveness in achieving justice for and between individuals to varying extents will be assessed by their ability to uphold notions of fairness, equality, access, timeliness, enforceability and resource efficiency.
Kolkey, D. M., Chernick, R., & Neal, B. R. (2012). Practitioners handbook on international arbitration and mediation (3rd ed.). Huntington: JurisNet.
Finally, based on common law, the principle of comity and equity may oblige the courts to recognize foreign arbitral award, regardless where the arbitration was seated. The US Courts
After carefully considering the situation in both plaintiff (Eunice) and defendant (RFYL), arbitration should be an effective Alternative Dispute Resolution in
Arbitration has existed in America for centuries. The Native American Indian tribes were believed to have used arbitral process to settle disputes between the tribe and those outside the tribe. “Long before the white man ever arrived in what is now the United States early Native American tribes used arbitration as not only a means to resolve disputes within the tribe but also as a means to resolve disputes between different tribes”. (laborstudies and research p.2). The concept arbitration with no doubt extended to the America from the European continent, largely from England, after she colonizing America. Arbitration among merchants were common, since it proved more efficient and effective that the courts during that period. The first US
2. Arbitration also involves the help of a neutral third party. Amid mediation, an "authority" demonstrations a bit comparable to a trial judge by listening to the gatherings' grievances. Not at all like an arbiter, is an authority, not a latent go-between facilitator. In the wake of listening to the gatherings, a mediator (regularly an expert in the gathering's subject of the question) really maintains a choice. Mediation is still less formal than an out and out trial on the grounds that numerous guidelines of proof don't make a difference to discretion. The assertion can either be tying or
There is currently a debate of whether Australia should introduce legislation allowing religious groups, including Muslims, Jews and others, to surrender themselves to the religious arbitration in areas of personal law, similar to the model that was in force in Ontario, Canada, from 1991 to 2005. Canada ultimately denied formal recognition of the religious arbitration but still accepted its existence only within the informal processes if the parties of the disputes are willing to use religious arbitration. The paper is to undertake a comparative examination of the model, as it existed in Ontario and the current position in Australia and examine the pros and cons for an
The interaction between Shari’a and international companies is increasing as Western companies seek to expand business into Muslim controlled countries. Muslims represent a quarter of the world’s population and Muslim countries control ten percent of the world’s economy. An increasing number of corporate contracts in the region require that arbitration be Shari’a compliant, and for contract arbitration to be mediated by religious leaders. Conflict occurs when Shari’a contradicts Western laws and values. Major concerns include differences in business practices,
One of the foundations of arbitration is that awards rendered are final and not subject to appeal before the courts. In this respect, Article 5 of the UNCITRAL Model Law provides for minimal intervention, and says, “In matters governed by this Law, no court shall intervene except where so provided in this Law“. As a result, the grounds upon which a court may set aside an award or refuse to recognize and enforce the same are limited. Article 34 of the Model Law and Article V of the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards provide the restrictive grounds for such relief.
Nevertheless, certain categories of ADR have been named and understood to involve the use of particular means and methods to produce the desired end result. These procedures include: negotiation, mediation, arbitration, med-arb, early neutral evaluation, settlement conference and conciliation to name a few. However this essay will concentrate on mediation as a form of alternative dispute resolution.
With all of these acts and statutes being passed, it seemed as though arbitration was the way to go. But as more and more agreements to arbitrate future disputes were executed, other nonarbitral forms of alternative dispute resolution such as mediation and neutral fact-finding became common.
Arbitration is legal technique used to resolve any disputes outside of the courts. Arbitration allows for speedy and cheap resolution of any disputes, the parties involved in a dispute agree to appoint a third person (arbitrator) who will hear their testimonies, and look into the evidence they provide. The arbitrator's decision cannot be challenged in a law court as it is considered final and the parties involved have to accept the decision (Brams & Merrill, 1986). There are only very limited circumstances where the decision of an arbitrator can be challenged, and this is mostly if there can be proof from one of the parties showing that the arbitrator was biased in their decision or ruling. The chosen arbitrator will be an experienced person in the area of the dispute.
An important reason for this popularity is that States have consented in advance to compulsory dispute settlement by the WTO and also, but to a lesser extent, by ICSID arbitration. In the case of the WTO it is the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding that confers compulsory jurisdiction on the WTO Dispute Settlement System; while in the case of ICSID a large number of States have consented in advance to ICSID jurisdiction over their disputes with investors by means of express provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties. Moreover, an important additional reason for the widespread use of ICSID as a forum for international dispute settlement is that investors – who are in effect the substantive rights holders under Bilateral Investment Treaties – are often given the right to institute ICSID arbitration directly against the host State.
International commercial arbitration is one of the most important legal institutions in international private law. This conclusion follows from the fact that the nature of arbitration depends largely on autonomy of the parties, who choose arbitration procedure as the procedure in which the dispute will be settled; place where the arbitration is to be held; arbitral tribunal etc. Probably the most important and considerable expression of the autonomy is the right to choose the law, which is to be applied to merits of the dispute. The chosen applicable law guarantees in large measure predictability of the outcome of the case and allows parties to control the scope of interpretation and application of the international commercial
ADR is useful in resolving virtually all genres of disputes by providing speedier, enforceable decisions through Arbitration, Mediation, Early Neutral Evaluation and other hybrid mechanisms. The presence of cost-effective and predictable ADR mechanisms capable of resolving complex disputes help to bolster the confidence of litigants within the country and therefore stimulates trade and investment both internationally and locally.