NY Convention Article V(1)(d): The Composition of Tribunal or the Procedure Was Not in Accordance with Party Agreement or with the Law of the Place of Arbitration - Chapter 6 - The Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards in Russia

Author(s):

William R. Spiegelberger

Page Count:

4 pages

Media Description:

1 PDF Download

Published:

August, 2014

Jurisdictions:

Practice Areas:

PDF595.04 KB

$40.00

Description:

Preview Page

NY Convention article V(1)(d) and ICA Law article 36(1)(4)

provide that enforcement may be denied if the composition of the

arbitral tribunal or the arbitral procedure was not in accordance with

the agreement of the parties, or, failing such agreement, not in

accordance with the law of the country where the arbitration took

place. It is said to be rarely invoked, and even more rarely

successful. In the three cases below, the objection failed in two

cases, and was successful in one case, which has been the subject of

some lively commentary.

A. Appointing Authority

1. Enforcement denied where the authority selected to appoint the

chair appointed instead a co-arbitrator

The case Duke Investment Ltd. v. The Kaliningrad Region

(enforcement denied)1 has a convoluted and problematic background

that is not apparent from the face of the relevant decisions. That

background has been ably discussed at length elsewhere.2 Here the

focus is solely on how the courts addressed the NY Convention
article V(1)(d) objection.