A Study of the Cross-Border Enforcement of Arbitral Awards Based on Penalty Clauses in English Law: Is Public Policy an Obstacle?

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cemre Bedir
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Border Enforcement ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Penalty Clauses ◽  
English Law ◽  
The Cross

scholarly journals The Cross-Border Enforcement of Court Settlements within Brussels Ia Regulation: From a European and an Austrian Perspective

Lexonomica ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-162
Author(s):  
Philipp Anzenberger
Keyword(s):  
Practical Relevance ◽  
Border Enforcement ◽  
European Regulation ◽  
Borderline Cases ◽  
General Overview ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Legal Instrument ◽  
The Cross

Despite the enormous practical relevance of court settlements, the Brussels Ia Regulation contains only a few explicit provisions for the cross-border enforcement of this legal instrument. This can cause difficulties in borderline cases, for example when it is doubtful whether the legal act in question is to be classified as a settlement or a judgment or which specific European regulation is applicable to a settlement containing several different claims. This paper provides a general overview of the rules for the enforcement of court settlements under the Brussels Ia Regulation and examines some problems that may specifically arise in the case of cross-border enforcement of court settlements.

From Conventions to Protocols: Conceptualizing Changes to the International Dispute Resolution Landscape

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-241
Author(s):  
Yvonne Guo
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Border Enforcement ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
International Dispute ◽  
Settlement Agreements ◽  
The Cross

Abstract The recently-concluded Singapore Mediation Convention and Hague Judgements Convention have aimed to facilitate the cross-border enforcement of mediated settlement agreements and court judgements in the same way that the New York Convention has facilitated the cross-border enforcement of arbitral awards. This shift in the international dispute resolution landscape is analysed on three levels: normative, strategic and operational. Drawing from theories of private international law, international political economy and comparative public policy, this article asserts that convergent public and private interests likely championed the elaboration of international conventions as a means of promoting harmonization in international dispute settlement. It demonstrates that while the conversion of court judgements and mediated settlement agreements into arbitral awards could also have facilitated their cross-border enforcement, the further development of new mechanisms that respond directly to commercial parties’ needs remains necessary to complement the evolving treaty framework.  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document