© Getty images
Kamran Rehman & Harriet Campbell explore how the Court of Appeal has clarified the limits of sovereign waiver under the New York Convention
- Two recent decisions from the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal highlight the differences between the ICSID Convention and the New York Convention, and the very different outcomes for investors seeking to enforce arbitral awards under them.
The Court of Appeal has reached an important decision on state immunity and the New York Convention. This judgment will have a significant impact on those seeking to enforce arbitral awards against sovereign states in this jurisdiction.
An arbitral award which cannot be enforced is of limited value. For that reason, the recognition and enforceability of arbitral awards are vital factors influencing the choice of arbitration as a dispute resolution method. The global reach and status of the New York Convention is unparallelled (with currently 172 parties). In theory, it gives parties confidence when entering international contracts that disputes can be resolved swiftly and effectively.
To access this full article please fill the form below.
If you already a subscriber to New Law Journal, please login here
-maryam-naaz-theo-corbett-and-rachel-carter-with-(front-from-left)-arya-vindlacheruvu-and-jessica-ashcroft.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=47f89300_1)
