Originally from American Review of International Arbitration - ARIA

Preview Page

I. INTRODUCTION
Although it is often said that one of the prime advantages of arbitration lies in the
finality of arbitral awards, very often the tribunal’s signature does not mark the end
of the dispute resolution process. Most jurisdictions provide for judicial review of
arbitration proceedings in some form.1 Parties will likely be wary of a regime that
completely eliminates judicial review, because they need assurance that such serious
procedural defects as fraud on the arbitrators, excess of powers, or improper
constitution of the tribunal will be corrected. At the same time, the proper scope and
content of post-award review is the subject of debate.2 Judicial review of an arbitral
decision can present an additional dilemma in international arbitration, in that courts
in the jurisdiction where the award is made can review the arbitration proceedings by
reference to local law.3 The arbitration site and its law, meanwhile, may have little
connection with the underlying dispute, having been chosen for such reasons as
procedural neutrality or the convenience of the parties.4
The unique problems presented by a domestic court reviewing a wholly foreign
dispute have led many nations to establish distinct standards of review for
international and domestic arbitration awards. Several Western European nations
have adopted some form of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial