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

LOG IN
LOG IN


Case Citations [1] (July 2021-April 2022)

handle is hein.ali/aliuslaw0024 and id is 1 raw text is: THE U.S. LAW OF INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL AND INVESTOR-STATE ARBITRATION (DRAFTS) CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS TOPIC 1. DEFINITIONS § 1.1 Definitions C.A.2, 2021. Quot. in case quot. in sup. (quoting § 1.1 of T.D. No. 2, 2012). Chinese companies petitioned for review of a decision by New York arbitral tribunal, hosted by the Permanent Court of Arbitration, alleging that the tribunal's award-in which it determined that a dispute between Mongolia and Chinese companies concerning ownership of mining rights was not arbitrable-should be reviewed de novo because the agreement between China and Mongolia concerning such disputes did not clearly assign the question of arbitrability to the tribunal. The district court denied petitioners' petition. This court affirmed, holding, inter alia, that the arbitration award did not result from an excess of arbitral power such that vacatur was appropriate under the Federal Arbitration Act. Quoting Restatement of the U.S. Law of International Commercial and Investor-State Arbitration § 1.1, the court explained that U.S. law applied to the award, because the Permanent Court designated the United States as the juridical home of the arbitration. Beijing Shougang Mining Inv. Co., Ltd. v. Mongolia, 11 F.4th 144, 159. COPYRIGHT ©2022 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination. ALI