Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards - Chapter 16 - Asian Leading Arbitrators' Guide to International Arbitration
Michael Hwang is currently a Vice Chairman of the ICC International Court of Arbitration, a Vice President of the International Council for Commercial Arbitration (ICCA), a Court Member of the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) and a Council Member of the International Council of Arbitration for Sports. He practices as a Senior Counsel of the Supreme Court of Singapore and a Chartered Arbitrator. He also serves as the Deputy Chief Justice of the Dubai International Financial Centre. He is a panelist of 16 national arbitration centres, the Permanent Court of Arbitration and the ICSID Panel of Arbitrators. He served as a Vice Chairman of the Arbitration Committee of the International Bar Association (IBA) from 2001 - 2003, a United Nations Compensation Commissioner from 2000 - 2002, and Acting High Court Judge of the Supreme Court of Singapore from 1991 - 1992. He is Singapore’s Non-Resident Ambassador to Switzerland.
Originally from Asian Leading Arbitrators' Guide to International Arbitration
The recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards is of fundamental importance in the arbitral process. Proper recognition and enforcement1 of arbitral awards serves both as a means of ensuring the effectiveness of the arbitral process, and also as a key factor favouring the use of arbitration in preference to other modes of dispute resolution.2
Parties choose arbitration as a dispute resolution process with the expectation that, absent a settlement, an award will be rendered at the end of the arbitral process. The end-product of the arbitral process, the award, is clearly of utmost importance to the parties, and the successful party expects the award to be performed without undue delay. Unless parties can be relatively certain that they will be able to enforce the award at the end of the arbitral proceedings (if not complied with voluntarily), “an award in their favour will be only a pyrrhic victory”,3 and would render the arbitral process largely meaningless.
Put another way, there is “no point in having arbitration-friendly laws, welldrafted arbitration rules, and competent arbitrators and counsel, if no effective enforcement mechanism is available, whether or not it is actually used”.4