...questions of fraud and malpractice, it was more fit to be decided by a trial in court.[3] In making its decision, the Supreme Court relied upon an earlier decision in...
...four weeks before initiating arbitration. The court enforced the clause because it was complete and certain in that it required “fair, honest and genuine discussion.”[32] The Court cautioned against conflating...
Author: Anna Conley* Published: October 2007 Jurisdiction: United States Topics: Court Decisions Judicial Assistance in Procedural Matters Practice and Procedure Discovery Evidence Description: I. INTRODUCTION Prior to 2004, federal courts...
...used materials kindly provided by speakers of the webinar devoted to compensating damages by suing Russia in Ukrainian courts and enforcing their decisions abroad to complement our research, and we...
...to govern commercial activity. OHADA’s Common Court of Justice in Arbitration (“CCJA”), seated in the Côte d’Ivoire, functions as a supranational Supreme Court, tasked with ensuring the common interpretation and...
...the term ‘commercial’ in line with the UNCITRAL Model Law, as many courts, including the Supreme Court of India have. The pronouncements of the Supreme Court of India leave no...
...arbitrability arguments to arbitrators and considered it as a frolic detour.[7] The supplier subsequently petitioned for certiorari from the Supreme Court and the court granted it. The Supreme Court...
...state legislations and observing the court decisions, it can be firmly ascertained “whether the principle of confidentiality is a right of parties or not?’ “RULE OF CONFIDENTIALITY”: A RIGHT...
...and the level of deference given to arbitrator decisions in competition law disputes, comparing the minimalist and maximalist perspectives. Finally, Section VI argues that courts must balance enforcing mandatory rules...
...clauses is evident from the wavering stance taken by different US courts. A careful analysis of the relevant judicial decisions reveals the considerations that are necessary to determine whether a...
...Gallery, Inc. v. Bauman[6] shows the inconsistency between the courts and market by demonstrating the influence of the experts regardless of the court’s decision. Although the court ruled that the...
...and increased laissez-faire system.[10] In Renusagar Power Co. Ltd. v. General Electric Co.,[11] the Supreme Court considered public policy in international arbitration. The Supreme Court considered the difference between public...
This website uses cookies as well as similar tools and technologies to understand visitors' experiences. By continuing to use this website, you consent to Columbia University's usage of cookies and similar technologies, in accordance with the Columbia University Website Cookie Notice.