It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Traditional set-aside theory is subject to considerable challenges as a result of an uncompromising trend towards autonomy and internationalism in international arbitration. The silence and ambiguity of international law regarding enforcement of set-aside arbitral awards allow some states to abandon their own set-aside authority or ignore set-aside decisions made by competent courts. This article presents a range of evidence that demonstrates the enforcement of set-aside arbitral awards has become a common phenomenon. This article first introduces robust academic debates regarding set-aside authority. Then this article exposes omission and ambiguity in the legal source, which leads to confusion in enforcement proceedings of set-aside arbitral awards. This article describes and analyses selected cases and practical data in order to summarize the approaches taken by national courts when reviewing foreign set-aside decisions. Finally, this article briefly evaluates the most promising solutions to the contradictory enforcement proceedings of set-aside arbitral awards.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China
2 Sun Yat-sen University Law School, China