Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- PART I International Court of Justice
- PART II International arbitration
- 12 A BIT about ICSID
- 13 The influence of bilateral investment treaties on customary international law
- 14 The United States 2004 Model Bilateral Investment Treaty: an exercise in the regressive development of international law
- 15 The United States 2004 Model Bilateral Investment Treaty and denial of justice in international law
- 16 Anti-suit injunctions in international arbitration: an overview
- 17 The law applicable in international arbitration: application of public international law
- 18 The validity of an arbitral award rendered by a truncated tribunal
- 19 The authority of a truncated tribunal
- 20 Injunction of arbitral proceedings and truncation of the tribunal
- 21 Public policy and arbitral procedure
- 22 The creation and operation of an International Court of Arbitral Awards
- 23 The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Aramco arbitrate the Onassis Agreement
- 24 The Southern Bluefin Tuna case
- 25 A celebration of the United Nations New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards
- 26 Does the consent of the Contracting Parties govern the requirement of an “investment” as specified in Article 25 of the ICSID Convention?
- PART III Miscellaneous
- Collected publications, judicial opinions and book reviews
- Index
21 - Public policy and arbitral procedure
from PART II - International arbitration
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 September 2011
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- PART I International Court of Justice
- PART II International arbitration
- 12 A BIT about ICSID
- 13 The influence of bilateral investment treaties on customary international law
- 14 The United States 2004 Model Bilateral Investment Treaty: an exercise in the regressive development of international law
- 15 The United States 2004 Model Bilateral Investment Treaty and denial of justice in international law
- 16 Anti-suit injunctions in international arbitration: an overview
- 17 The law applicable in international arbitration: application of public international law
- 18 The validity of an arbitral award rendered by a truncated tribunal
- 19 The authority of a truncated tribunal
- 20 Injunction of arbitral proceedings and truncation of the tribunal
- 21 Public policy and arbitral procedure
- 22 The creation and operation of an International Court of Arbitral Awards
- 23 The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Aramco arbitrate the Onassis Agreement
- 24 The Southern Bluefin Tuna case
- 25 A celebration of the United Nations New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards
- 26 Does the consent of the Contracting Parties govern the requirement of an “investment” as specified in Article 25 of the ICSID Convention?
- PART III Miscellaneous
- Collected publications, judicial opinions and book reviews
- Index
Summary
Introduction
To speak of public policy, those mandatory norms that comprise a State's “most basic notions of morality and justice,” as it relates solely to arbitral procedure may at first seem obscure and narrow, as the relationship between the two topics is not immediately self-evident. On reflection, however, the subject reveals its interest and importance, particularly once procedure is understood to encompass the entire process of arbitration, the underlying structure that causes arbitration to be viewed as part of a legal system. States are impelled, in order to protect their “fundamental norms of procedural fairness,” to exert control over the process of arbitration. At the very least, if the form and the underlying process by which an arbitral award was created do not meet all potentially applicable domestic procedural requirements, there will be confusion over where and to what extent the award will be enforceable, particularly if it involves transnational commerce.
The domestic mandatory norms applicable to procedure, including those specifically related to arbitral procedure, differ from State to State. The need to control and limit the arbitral process thus may conflict with certain needs of international commerce, such as the principle of party autonomy and the desire for certainty of enforcement of arbitral awards. In this way, as has been the case in other areas, public policy has been a limiting principle in efforts to unify and simplify the laws governing international commercial arbitration.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Justice in International LawFurther Selected Writings, pp. 220 - 245Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2011