In recent years, as arbitration has become increasingly used to resolve international commercial disputes, there has been sotto voce competition among venues for the siting of international arbitrations. Two of the most important venues are London and New York. One of the accusations about problems allegedly existing in arbitrations in New York—and indeed elsewhere in the United States—is the supposedly important doctrine of “manifest disregard of the law,” a nonstatutory, judicially derived basis for challenging arbitral awards that can entail a court examining the record before the arbitral tribunal to determine whether it flouted an important legal principle that was material to the award. The argument has been made by detractors of New York as an arbitral venue that, in effect, arbitral awards can be reviewed by courts in New York in the same way as appellate courts review judgments of lower courts
We discussed, in our article in this Journal in 2013,1 that, according to a study done by the International Commercial Disputes Committee of the New York City Bar, there is in fact little to fear from applications made on the basis of manifest disregard, particularly with respect to international arbitration awards, because awards have very seldom been set aside on the basis of it.2
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
