21st Century Enforcement Strategies - WAMR 2014 Vol. 8, No. 4
Author(s):
Elizabeth Snodgrass
John Fellas
Tom Sikora
Jim Mintz
Page Count:
24 pages
Media Description:
1 PDF Download
Published:
February, 2015
Jurisdictions:
Description:
Originally From World Arbitration and Mediation Review (WAMR)
Preview Page
I. MOCK SCENARIO
Following a protracted and hard-fought arbitration in
Puritania, Apex Oil Corp. (“Apex”) has received an award of US$
2.3 billion in its favor against the National Oil Company of
Puritania (“PNOC”). Apex’s victory celebrations have been
interrupted by a phone call from local counsel in Puritania
advising that PNOC has moved the courts of Puritania to have the
award set aside on grounds that the arbitrators “misdirected
themselves” by awarding interest on the sum of damages at a
“usurious” rate of LIBOR + 4% which was neither proper
according to the governing local law nor consistent with
Puritanian public policy. Local counsel has advised that the
award is likely to be set aside by the Puritanian courts, at least at
first instance. Loose drafting of the arbitration statute and some
residual opposition to arbitration in principle has set a precedent
of activist/merits-based review of arbitral awards. That said, the
Puritanian appellate courts have been making an effort to rein
this in, so local counsel is reasonably optimistic that any setting
aside will be overturned on appeal. Given the backlog of cases in
the Puritanian courts, though, the whole thing is likely to take at
least 3-5 years to resolve.
Apex’s General Counsel has just returned from breaking the
bad news to the CEO with two clear instructions: (1) to determine
what Apex can do to realize some value from the award as soon as
possible; and (2) to determine what Apex can do to put pressure
on PNOC to comply with the award. He has hastily convened a
“brain trust,” including outside counsel and an asset tracing
specialist, to talk through the options.
specialist, to talk through the options.