Please fill in the blanks using the completed “f)” as an example, with distinctions between annulment and revision of arbitral awards. (For this question, the word “revision” encompasses petitions of correction, interpretation, supplementation and discovery of a new fact or evidence that could decisively affect the award.)
f) Annulment proceedings take place before a distinct body whereas a revision is heard before the same arbitral tribunal that rendered the award.
The parties from states A and B decide to include in their arbitration agreement the “absence of unanimous decision” as a ground of non-recognition and non-enforcement of the award. A dispute arose between A and B and arbitration proceedings are initiated. The arbitral tribunal composed of 3 arbitrators rendered an award in a two-to-one decision against B. The winning party seeks in state C court, recognition and enforcement of the award. Conversely, B requests the non-recognition and non-enforcement of the award on the ground of “absence of unanimous decision” pursuant to the arbitration agreement.
State C is silent on the absence of a unanimous decision as a ground to set aside an award. Also, C is a contracting party of the New York Convention. Accordingly, the court will likely:
a) dismiss the claim and recognize and enforce the award rendered because the ground added by the parties is not considered in state C legislation nor in the NY convention. Why?
b) hear the case as long as the added ground is not inconsistent with mandatory rules of state C in which the recognition and the enforcement of the award will take place. Why?
c) hear the case, without any precondition, in accordance with the well-established doctrine of the insularity of an arbitration agreement. Why?
d) hear the case. Why?
In an investor-state arbitration under the ICSID arbitration rules the losing party wants to challenge the recognition and enforcement of the award in a court of a State that is party to the NY Convention. The court:
a) may hear the case but only if the presumptive recognition of the validity of an international award is established prima facie. Why?
b) may hear the case and decide on the merits of the challenge without prima facie examination of the presumptive validity of the award. Why?
c) may refuse the request. Why?
d) must hear the request if the requesting party can proves one of the grounds established in the NY Convention. Why?
What is the difference between enforcement and execution of an international arbitral award?