Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards

The Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, commonly known as the New York Convention, was adopted by a United Nations diplomatic conference on 10 June 1958 and entered into force on 7 June 1959. The Convention requires courts of contracting states to give effect to private agreements to arbitrate and to recognize and enforce arbitration awards made in other contracting states. Widely considered the foundational instrument for international arbitration, it applies to arbitrations that are not considered as domestic awards in the state where recognition and enforcement is sought.

New York Convention
Parties to the convention
Signed10 June 1958 (1958-06-10)
LocationNew York City, United States
Effective7 June 1959
Condition3 ratifications
Signatories24
Parties166
DepositariesSecretary-General of the United Nations
LanguagesArabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish
Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards at Wikisource

The New York Convention is very successful. Nowadays many countries have adopted Arbitration laws based on the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration. This works with the New York Convention so that the provisions on making an enforceable award, or asking a court to set it aside or not enforce it, are the same under the Model Law and the New York Convention. The Model Law does not replace the NYC, it works with it. An award made in a country which is not a signatory to the NYC cannot take advantage of the Convention to enforce that award in the 166 Contracting States unless there is some bilateral recognition, whether or not the Arbitration was held under the provisions of the UNCITRAL Model Law.

Background

In 1953, the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) produced the first draft Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of International Arbitral Awards to the United Nations Economic and Social Council. With slight modifications, the Council submitted the convention to the International Conference in the Spring of 1958. The Conference was chaired by Willem Schurmann, the Dutch Permanent Representative to the United Nations and Oscar Schachter, a leading figure in international law who later taught at Columbia Law School and the Columbia School of International and Public Affairs, and served as the President of the American Society of International Law.

International arbitration is an increasingly popular means of alternative dispute resolution for cross-border commercial transactions. The primary advantage of arbitration over court litigation is enforceability: an arbitration award is enforceable in most countries in the world. Other advantages of arbitration include the ability to select a neutral forum to resolve disputes, that arbitration awards are final and not ordinarily subject to appeal, the ability to choose flexible procedures for the arbitration, and confidentiality.

Once a dispute between parties is settled, the winning party needs to collect the award or judgment. If the loser voluntarily pays, no court action is necessary.[1] Otherwise, unless the assets of the losing party are located in the country where the court judgment was rendered, the winning party needs to obtain a court judgment in the jurisdiction where the other party resides or where its assets are located. Unless there is a treaty on recognition of court judgments between the country where the judgment is rendered and the country where the winning party seeks to collect, the winning party will be unable to use the court judgment to collect.

Cases and statistics

Public information on overall and specific arbitration cases is quite limited as there is no need to involve the courts at all unless there is a dispute, and in most cases the loser pays voluntarily.[1] A review of disputed cases in China found that from 2000 to 2011, the Supreme People's Court upheld the refusal to enforce the arbitration agreement in 17 cases due to a provision in Article V (China has an automatic appeal system to the highest court, so this includes all such refusals).[2]

Summary of provisions

Under the Convention, an arbitration award issued in any other state can generally be freely enforced in any other contracting state, only subject to certain, limited defenses. These defenses are:[3]

  1. a party to the arbitration agreement was, under the law applicable to him, under some incapacity, or the arbitration agreement was not valid under its governing law;
  2. a party was not given proper notice of the appointment of the arbitrator or of the arbitration proceedings, or was otherwise unable to present its case;
  3. the award deals with an issue not contemplated by or not falling within the terms of the submission to arbitration, or contains matters beyond the scope of the arbitration (subject to the proviso that an award which contains decisions on such matters may be enforced to the extent that it contains decisions on matters submitted to arbitration which can be separated from those matters not so submitted);
  4. the composition of the arbitral tribunal was not in accordance with the agreement of the parties or, failing such agreement, with the law of the place where the hearing took place (the "lex loci arbitri");
  5. the award has not yet become binding upon the parties, or has been set aside or suspended by a competent authority, either in the country where the arbitration took place, or pursuant to the law of the arbitration agreement;
  6. the subject matter of the award was not capable of resolution by arbitration; or
  7. enforcement would be contrary to "public policy".

Additionally, there are three types of reservations that countries may apply:[4]

  1. Conventional Reservation - some countries only enforce arbitration awards issued in a Convention member state
  2. Commercial Reservation – some countries only enforce arbitration awards that are related to commercial transactions
  3. Reciprocity reservation – some countries may choose not to limit the Convention to only awards from other contracting states, but may however limit application to awards from non-contracting states such that they will only apply it to the extent to which such a non-contracting state grants reciprocal treatment.

States may make any or all of the above reservations. Because there are two similar issues conflated under the term "reciprocity", it is important to determine which such reservation (or both) an enforcing state has made.

Parties to the Convention

As of August 2020, the Convention has 166 state parties, which includes 162 of the 193 United Nations member states plus the Cook Islands, the Holy See, and the State of Palestine. Thirty-three UN member states have not yet adopted the Convention. In addition, Taiwan has not been permitted to adopt the Convention (but generally enforces foreign arbitration judgments) and a number of British Overseas Territories have not had the Convention extended to them by Order in Council. British Overseas Territories to which the New York Convention has not yet been extended by Order in Council are: Anguilla, Falkland Islands, Turks and Caicos Islands, Montserrat, Saint Helena (including Ascension and Tristan da Cunha).

State Date of Adoption State Date of Adoption
 Afghanistan30 November 2005 Albania27 June 2001
 Algeria7 February 1989 Andorra19 June 2015
 Angola6 March 2017
 Antigua and Barbuda2 February 1989 Argentina14 March 1989
 Armenia29 December 1997 Australia26 March 1975
 Austria2 May 1961 Azerbaijan29 February 2000
 Bahamas20 December 2006 Bahrain6 April 1988
 Bangladesh6 May 1992 Barbados16 March 1993
 Belarus15 November 1960 Belgium18 August 1975
 Benin16 May 1974 Bhutan25 September 2014
 Bolivia28 April 1995 Bosnia and Herzegovina1 September 1993
 Botswana20 December 1971 Brazil7 June 2002
 Brunei25 July 1996 Bulgaria10 October 1961
 Burkina Faso23 March 1987 Burundi23 June 2014
 Cambodia5 January 1960 Cameroon19 February 1988
 Canada12 May 1986 Cape Verde22 March 2018
 Central African Republic15 October 1962
 Chile4 September 1975 People's Republic of China22 January 1987
 Colombia25 September 1979 Democratic Republic of the Congo5 November 2014
 Comoros28 April 2015 Costa Rica26 October 1987
 Côte d'Ivoire1 February 1991 Cook Islands12 January 2009
 Croatia26 July 1993 Cuba30 December 1974
 Cyprus29 December 1980 Czech Republic30 September 1993
 Denmark22 December 1972 Djibouti14 June 1983
 Dominica28 October 1988 Dominican Republic11 April 2002
 Ecuador3 January 1962 El Salvador10 Jun 1958
 Estonia30 August 1993 Ethiopia24 August 2020
 Fiji26 December 2010
 Finland19 January 1962 France26 June 1959
 Gabon15 December 2006 Georgia2 June 1994
 Germany30 June 1961 Ghana9 April 1968
 Greece16 July 1962 Guatemala21 March 1984
 Guinea23 January 1991 Guyana25 September 2014
 Haiti5 December 1983  Holy See14 May 1975
 Honduras3 October 2000 Hungary5 March 1962
 Iceland24 January 2002 India13 July 1960
 Indonesia7 October 1981 Iran, Islamic Republic of15 October 2001
 Ireland12 May 1981 Israel5 January 1959
 Italy31 January 1969 Jamaica10 July 2002
 Japan20 June 1961 Jordan15 November 1979
 Kazakhstan20 November 1995 Kenya10 February 1989
 South Korea8 February 1973 Kuwait28 April 1978
 Kyrgyzstan18 December 1996 Laos17 June 1998
 Latvia14 April 1992 Lebanon11 August 1998
 Lesotho13 June 1989 Liberia16 September 2005
 Lithuania14 March 1995 Liechtenstein5 October 2011
 Luxembourg9 September 1983 Republic of Macedonia10 March 1994
 Madagascar16 July 1962 Malaysia5 November 1985
 Maldives17 September 2019
 Mali8 September 1994 Malta22 June 2000
 Marshall Islands21 December 2006 Mauritania30 January 1997
 Mauritius19 June 1996 Mexico14 April 1971
 Moldova18 September 1998 Monaco2 June 1982
 Mongolia24 October 1994 Montenegro23 October 2006
 Morocco12 February 1959 Mozambique11 June 1998
 Myanmar16 April 2013   Nepal4 March 1998
 Netherlands24 April 1964 New Zealand6 January 1983
 Nicaragua24 September 2003 Niger14 October 1964
 Nigeria17 March 1970 Norway14 March 1961
 Oman25 February 1999
 Pakistan14 July 2005 Palau31 March 2020
 Palestine2 January 2015 Panama10 October 1984
 Papua New Guinea17 July 2019 Paraguay8 October 1997
 Peru7 July 1988 Philippines6 July 1967
 Poland3 October 1961 Portugal18 October 1994
 Qatar30 December 2002 Romania13 September 1961
 Russia24 August 1960 Rwanda31 October 2008
 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines12 September 2000 San Marino17 May 1979
 Sao Tome and Principe20 November 2012 Saudi Arabia19 April 1994
 Senegal17 October 1994 Serbia12 March 2001
 Seychelles3 February 2020 Sierra Leone28 October 2020
 Singapore21 August 1986 Slovakia28 May 1993
 Slovenia6 July 1992 South Africa3 May 1976
 Spain12 May 1977 Sri Lanka9 April 1962
 Sudan26 March 2018 Sweden28 January 1972
  Switzerland1 June 1965 Syria9 March 1959
 Tanzania13 October 1964 Tajikistan14 August 2012
 Thailand21 December 1959 Tonga12 June 2020
 Trinidad and Tobago14 February 1966 Tunisia17 July 1967
 Turkey2 July 1992 Uganda12 February 1992
 Ukraine10 October 1960 United Arab Emirates21 August 2006
 United Kingdom24 September 1975 United States30 September 1970
 Uruguay30 March 1983 Uzbekistan7 February 1996
 Venezuela8 February 1995 Vietnam12 September 1995
 Zambia14 March 2002 Zimbabwe26 September 1994

The Convention has also been extended to a number of British Crown Dependencies, Overseas Territories, Overseas departments, Unincorporated Territories and other subsidiary territories of sovereign states.

Territory Date of Ratification Territory Date of Ratification
 American Samoa Aruba24 April 1964
 Ashmore and Cartier Islands Australian Antarctic Territory
 Baker Island Bermuda14 November 1979
 Bonaire24 April 1964
 British Virgin Islands25 May 2014 Christmas Island26 March 1975
 Cayman Islands26 November 1980 Cocos (Keeling) Islands26 March 1975
 Coral Sea Islands Curaçao24 April 1964
 Faroe Islands10 February 1976
 French Guiana French Polynesia26 June 1959
 French Southern and Antarctic Lands Gibraltar24 September 1975
 Greenland10 February 1976 Guadeloupe
 Guam30 September 1970 Guernsey19 April 1985
 Heard Island and McDonald Islands Howland Island
 Isle of Man22 February 1979 Jarvis Island
 Jersey19 April 1985 Johnston Atoll
 Kingman Reef Martinique
 Mayotte Midway Atoll
 Navassa Island New Caledonia26 June 1959
 Norfolk Island Palmyra Atoll
 Puerto Rico Réunion
 Saba24 April 1964 Saint Pierre and Miquelon
 Sint Eustatius24 April 1964 Sint Maarten24 April 1964
 United States Virgin Islands Wake Island
 Wallis and Futuna

States which are not party to the Convention

 Belize Chad Republic of the Congo
 Equatorial Guinea Eritrea eSwatini formerly Swaziland
 Gambia Grenada Guinea-Bissau
 Iraq Kiribati Libya
 Malawi Federated States of Micronesia Namibia
 Nauru Niue North Korea
 Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Samoa
 Solomon Islands Somalia South Sudan
 Suriname Timor-Leste Togo
 Turkmenistan Tuvalu Vanuatu
 Yemen

United States issues

Under American law, the recognition of foreign arbitral awards is governed by chapter 2 of the Federal Arbitration Act, which incorporates the New York Convention.[5]

Therefore, the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the "Convention") preempts state law. In Foster v. Neilson, the Supreme Court held "Our constitution declares a treaty to be the law of the land. It is, consequently, to be regarded in courts of justice as equivalent to an act of the Legislature, whenever it operates of itself without the aid of any legislative provision."[6] Thus, over a course of 181 years, the United States Supreme Court has repeatedly held that a self-executing treaty is an act of the Legislature (i.e., act of Congress).

With specific regard to the New York Convention, at least one court discussed, but ultimately avoided, the issue of whether the treaty is self-executing. The court nonetheless held that the Convention was, at the least, an implemented non-self-executing treaty that still had legal force as a treaty (as distinguished from an Act of Congress).[7] Based on that determination, the court held that the Convention preempted state law that sought to void arbitration clauses in international reinsurance treaties.

See also

References

  1. Argen, Robert (1 January 2015). "Ending Blind Spot Justice: Broadening the Transparency Trend in International Arbitration". Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. SSRN 2393188. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  2. ""Implementation of the New York Convention in China" by Xiaohong Xia". digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu. Retrieved 21 March 2016.
  3. ""Enforcement of Arbitral Awards under the New York Convention - Practic" by Joseph T. McLaughlin and Laurie Genevro". scholarship.law.berkeley.edu. Retrieved 21 March 2016.
  4. "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 20 June 2013. Retrieved 14 May 2014.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link) New York Convention, 1958 - Reservations
  5. "New York Arbitration" (PDF). CMS Legal. Retrieved 21 May 2012.
  6. Foster v. Neilson, 27 U.S. 253, 314 (1829). See also Valentine v. U.S. ex rel. Neidecker, 57 S.Ct. 100, 103 (1936); Medellin v. Dretke, 125 S.Ct. 2088, 2103 (2005); Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon, 126 S.Ct. 2669, 2695 (2006).
  7. Safety National Casualty Corp. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London, 587 F.3d 714 (5th Cir. 2009) (en banc), cert. den'd, 562 U.S. 827 (2010).
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.