Public Policy with Reference to Setting aside the Arbitral Award in India
Abstract
Public Policy in reference of setting aside of arbitral award in respect domestic and international commercial arbitral award is sine quo non in the furtherance of national and international judicial interpretation as well as national and international legal framework. It involves variety of interpretations in order to setting the uniform interpretation in the context of public policy where explicatively determined the scope for the strengthening enforcement of such arbitral award.
Downloads
References
Aldemir, H. (2011). Mubāhalah as a method of dispute resolution. İnsan & Toplum: Human & Society, 1(2), 151–154.
Dubey, Y. (2018). Analysis of Public Policy and Enforcement of Domestic and Foreign Arbitral Awards in India. Christ University Law Journal, 7(2), 63–82. https://doi.org/10.12728/culj.13.4
Dunna, G. T. (2018). Introducing “Public Policy” to Enforcement of Foreign Judgments: Lessons from the Law of Arbitration. Transnational Dispute Management (TDM), 15(2).
Ebb, L. F. (1994). Reflections on the Indian Enforcement of the GE/Renusagar Award. Arbitration International, 10(2), 141–162. https://doi.org/10.1093/arbitration/10.2.141
Fawcett, J. J., & Carruthers, J. M. (2008). Cheshire, North and Fawcett Private international law, cxliii+1390.
G Banerji. (2009). Judicial Intervention in Arbitral Awards: A Practitioner’s Thoughts. JSTOR.
Gupta, P. K., & Mittal, P. (2020). Corporate governance and risk bundling: Evidence from Indian companies. European Journal of Business Science and Technology, 6(1), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.11118/EJOBSAT.2020.004
Gupta, S., & Mittal, P. (2015). Base Erosion and Profit Shifting: The New Framework of International Taxation. Journal of Business Management and Information Systems, 2(2), 108–114. https://doi.org/10.48001/jbmis.2015.0202009
Hollander, P. (2016). Report on the Public Policy Exception in the New York Convention. Dispute Resolution International, 10(1), 35.
Law, I., & Pandey, M. S. (2020). Public Policy as an Exception to Compliance with International Obligations: Lessons from and for India.
Malhotra, O. P. (2007). The Scope of Public Policy under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Student Bar Review, 19.
Mittal, P. (2020a). A multi-criterion decision analysis based on PCA for analyzing the digital technology skills in the effectiveness of government services. 2020 International Conference on Decision Aid Sciences and Application, DASA 2020, 490–494. https://doi.org/10.1109/DASA51403.2020.9317241
Mittal, P. (2020b). Impact of Digital Capabilities and Technology Skills on Effectiveness of Government in Public Services. 2020 International Conference on Data Analytics for Business and Industry: Way Towards a Sustainable Economy, ICDABI 2020. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDABI51230.2020.9325647
MR, M. (2020). The Unfolding of Arbitration Regime an Indian Perspective. HeinOnline.
Sebastian, T., & Arya, G. B. (2013). Critical Appraisal of ‘Patent Illegaility’ as a Ground for Setting Aside an Arbitral Award in India. Bond Law Review, 24(2). https://doi.org/10.53300/001c.5596
Sharma, V. (2011). Enforceability of Arbitral Awards in India: Public Policy as a Ground for Setting Aside the Award. Transnational Dispute Management (TDM), 8(5).
Srinivasan, B. (2012). Public Policy and Setting Aside Patently Illegal Arbitral Awards in India. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1958201
All QTanalytics journals are published Open Access. Articles are licensed under an open access licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. In addition, the article may be reused and quoted provided that the original published version is cited. These conditions allow for maximum use and exposure of the work, while ensuring that the authors receive proper credit.
journals@qtanalytics.in, support@qtanalytics.in | Phone: +91-9458270556
