About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


Case Citations [1] (April 2017 through August 2017)

handle is hein.ali/aliuslaw0019 and id is 1 raw text is: THE U.S. LAW OF INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION (DRAFTS) CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS TOPIC 1. DEFINITIONS § 1-1. Definitions C.A.2, 2017. Subsecs. (g), (i), (k), (1), (s), and (z) cit. in sup.; subsec. (aa) quot. in sup. (citing and quoting § 1-1 of T.D. No. 2, 2010). After Brazilian corporations received a foreign arbitration award against Swiss debtor for its failure to pay for pig iron that corporations had supplied, corporations brought an action to enforce the award against companies, among others, alleging that companies were alter-egos and successors-in-interest of the then-defunct award debtor. The district court granted defendants' motion to dismiss. This court vacated and remanded, holding that the district court erred in finding that plaintiffs were required to bring an action to confirm their foreign arbitral award before they could seek to enforce it. The court relied on Restatement of the U.S. Law of International Commercial Arbitration § 1-1, determining that the New York Convention governed this case because the seat of the arbitration was France. CBF Inddstria de Gusa S/A v. AMCI Holdings, Inc., 850 F.3d 58, 70, 72-75. CHAPTER 2. ENFORCEMENT OF THE ARBITRATION AGREEMENT TOPIC 2. DEFENSES TO ENFORCEMENT OF AN ARBITRATION AGREEMENT § 2-16. Contrary to Public Policy C.A.D.C.2016. Subsecs. (a) and (b) cit. in sup. (citing § 2-16, subsecs. (a) and (b), of T.D. No. 4, 2015). Energy company filed a petition for confirmation and enforcement of an arbitration award it had obtained against the Federal Republic of Nigeria in connection with the parties' power-purchase agreement. The district court granted the petition. While affirming, this court held that, although the agreement contained an arbitration provision specifying that the parties expressly waived, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, any right to challenge an award by the arbitrators anywhere outside of London, defendant did not thereby contractually waive its right to assert a public-policy defense to enforcement of the award under the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards in U.S. courts. The court cited Restatement of the U.S. Law of International Commercial Arbitration § 2-16 in reasoning that parties to arbitration agreements could not waive their rights under u A n iFor earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.