header-logo header-logo

02 December 2016 / Jan-Jaap Baer
Issue: 7725 / Categories: Features , Profession , ADR
printer mail-detail

New York state of mind

nlj_7725_baer

Will the Hague Convention be to court litigation what the New York Convention has been to arbitration, asks Jan-Jaap Baer

When it comes to doing business internationally, there are two important and related disputes risks that parties typically address upfront in their contracts:

  • Forum risk—in what forum will any dispute be resolved?
  • Enforcement risk—will you get a court judgment or arbitral award which “travels” well, allowing swift and easy access to the rewards of your victory?

In both areas arbitration currently has benefits over court litigation. This is due to the successful 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards (the New York Convention) which ensures that:

  • arbitration agreements are widely recognised, whereas choice of court agreements are not always respected under divergent national rules, particularly where cases are brought before a court other than that chosen by the parties;
  • arbitral awards are generally easier to enforce than court judgments, as most countries are party to the New York Convention but there is no real equivalent for court
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll