NEW YORK CONVENTION 1958 on the RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN ARBITRAL AWARDS:
AINTERNATIONAL TREATY adopted on 10 June 1958 in New York — 172 State Parties; STREAMLINES enforcement of foreign awards; LIMITED GROUNDS for refusal (Article V) — incapacity, no notice, beyond scope, public policy of enforcing state
Bonly US law (cf. Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (New York Convention)) (cf. Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (New York Convention))
Conly India (cf. Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (New York Convention)) (cf. Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (New York Convention))
Dnot adopted (cf. Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (New York Convention)) (cf. Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (New York Convention))
Answer & Solution
Correct answer: A. INTERNATIONAL TREATY adopted on 10 June 1958 in New York — 172 State Parties; STREAMLINES enforcement of foreign awards; LIMITED GROUNDS for refusal (Article V) — incapacity, no notice, beyond scope, public policy of enforcing state
1. The Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (NEW YORK CONVENTION) was adopted on 10 June 1958 and entered into force on 7 June 1959.
2. 172 STATES are Parties — making it ONE OF THE MOST SUCCESSFUL TREATIES.
3. INDIA acceded on 13 July 1960 with RESERVATIONS:
4. (a) RECIPROCITY — only awards from other Contracting States;
5. (b) COMMERCIAL — only commercial matters.
6. KEY PROVISIONS:
7. (i) Article II: arbitration agreements MUST be in writing; CONTRACTING STATES recognize them;
8. (ii) Article III: recognition and enforcement of foreign awards;
9. (iii) ARTICLE V: GROUNDS FOR REFUSAL of enforcement (narrow):
10. (a) Incapacity of party;
11. (b) Invalid arbitration agreement under applicable law;
12. (c) Inadequate notice or inability to present case;
13. (d) Award goes BEYOND scope of submission;
14. (e) IMPROPER COMPOSITION of tribunal;
15. (f) Award not yet binding or set aside;
16. (g) Subject matter not arbitrable under law of enforcing state;
17. (h) Award contrary to PUBLIC POLICY of enforcing state.
18. Hence option B is correct.
_Source: Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (Bare Act) + Mediation Act 2023 — Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (New York Convention)_
Related questions
In SBP & Co. v. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD (2005) 8 SCC 618, the Supreme Court held that the JUSection 28 Arbitration Act 1996 specifies APPLICABLE LAW:Section 39 Arbitration Act 1996 grants the arbitral tribunal LIEN on the:INTERIM AWARD under Arbitration Act 1996:Section 38 Arbitration Act 1996 (DEPOSITS) requires parties to:DOMESTIC ARBITRATION versus INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION:Section 21 Arbitration Act 1996 defines COMMENCEMENT OF ARBITRATION as:Section 43 Arbitration Act 1996 (LIMITATION) provides that the period of LIMITATION ACT 19