Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Courts Have The Final Say: Does The Doctrine Of Manifest Disregard Promote Lawful Arbitral Awards Or Disguise Unlawful Judicial Review, Lindsay Biesterfeld
Courts Have The Final Say: Does The Doctrine Of Manifest Disregard Promote Lawful Arbitral Awards Or Disguise Unlawful Judicial Review, Lindsay Biesterfeld
Journal of Dispute Resolution
In exchange for a speedy, economical dispute resolution process, parties that submit to binding arbitration assume the risk that an arbitrator might misapply the law. United States Supreme Court precedent and federal law favor agreements to arbitrate by limiting judicial review of arbitral awards and requiring courts to "rigorously enforce arbitration agreements." These judicial constraints support the arbitral goals of efficiency and finality by reducing the risk that arbitral awards will be vacated on appeal. To balance the risk that arbitrators may abuse this standard of review, courts have supplemented restricted judicial review with a doctrine that allows an arbitral …
Enforcement Of Arbitral Awards Against Foreign States Or State Agencies, S.I. Strong
Enforcement Of Arbitral Awards Against Foreign States Or State Agencies, S.I. Strong
Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business
For years, U.S. courts took a highly deferential, "hands-off' approach to litigation involving a foreign sovereign. However, recent case law out of the D.C. Circuit has radically diminished the jurisdictional elements that plaintiffs must establish before a U.S. court will assert its power to enforce an arbitral award against a foreign state or state agency. This Article investigates this recent shift and describes what contacts, if any, a foreign state or state agency must have with the United States before a U.S. court will assert jurisdiction under sections 1605(a)(1) and 1605(a)(6) of the U.S. Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act ("FSIA").4 This …