|Help

Review of Court Decisions - Dispute Resolution Journal - Vol. 46, No. 3

Page Count: 
6 pages
Published: 
August, 1991
Jurisdictions: 
United States,
New York,
South Carolina
Practice Areas: 
Construction,
FAA,
Enforceability of Arbitration Agreements,
Commercial Disputes,
Proceedings to Determine or Modify Arbitration Agreement,
Evidence,
Parties,
Employment,
Arbitrability,
Labor,
National Legislation,
Interim Measures of Protection,
Authority of the Arbitral Tribunal,
Securities,
Third Parties in Arbitral Proceedings,
Court Decisions,
Agreement to Arbitrate,
Operation and Effects,
Contents of Arbitration Agreement
Tags: 
Forum Non Conveniens,
In Rem Jurisdiction,
In Personam Jurisdiction,
Arbitrator Misconduct,
Discrimination, Age,
Civil Rights Disputes,
Tort,
Grievance Disputes,
National Labor Relations Board,
National Labor Relations Act,
Labor Management Relations Act,
Parallel Proceedings,
Norris-Laguardia Act,
Restraining Order,
Rabbinical Arbitration,
Domestic Disputes,
Agency,
Consent,
Standing,
Incorporation by Reference

PDF4.54 MB

$40.00
Description: 

Originally from Dispute Resolution Journal

INTERNATIONAL- U.N. CONVENTION- SERVICE-WAIVER- IN REM JURISDICTION- lN PERSONAM JURISDICTION- FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE- RESERVATION vs. RESTRICTION OF DEFENSES

Because of a party's failure to show why improper service necessitated a refusal to recognize and enforce an arbitration award, the court granted the opposing party's motion to confirm the arbitration award.

Sembawang filed an action against the vessel M/V Charger and her owner, Charger, Inc., to enforce a maritime lien. Sembawang asserted in rem jurisdiction and seized the vessel. It also claimed in personam jurisdiction over the M/V Charger and Charger. Service of process was attempted three weeks after the complaint was filed. In personam service, however, was not effected until nine months after Sembawang had filed its complaint. The court action was stayed pending arbitration in Singapore, which resulted in an award in favor of Sembawang. When Sembawang moved to confirm pursuant to the U.N. Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (Convention), Charger moved to lift the stay and quash the service of process. Charger claimed that service was improper because the date on which it was effected was beyond the 120-day time limit required under rule 4(j) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.