Fraud and arbitrability: A critical view of the Sulu case


FRAUD and the issue of arbitrability was an ongoing debate even before the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (NYC 1958) was adopted at the United Nations in 1958. This debate has not abated even in countries that have also adopted UNCITRAL (United Nations Commission on International Trade Law) Model Law 1985 wholly or partly to support NYC 1958.

One of the main short comings of NYC 1958 is that it can promote the issuance of fraudulent awards without the participation of the victim – ie respondent to the award – which are not within the prescribed terms of the convention and get them enforced through the courts by an ex-parte order if the enforcement court is not vigilant.

Subscribe or renew your subscriptions to win prizes worth up to RM68,000!

Monthly Plan

RM13.90/month

Annual Plan

RM12.33/month

Billed as RM148.00/year

1 month

Free Trial

For new subscribers only


Cancel anytime. No ads. Auto-renewal. Unlimited access to the web and app. Personalised features. Members rewards.
Follow us on our official WhatsApp channel for breaking news alerts and key updates!

Sulu case , arbitration , legal system , fraud ,

   

Next In Letters

Last chance to get plastics treaty right
Don’t jail them, make them work
We need to listen to children
Catalyst for public service reformation
Foreign worker problem in Penang
We need to manage waste better
Ensuring effective DLP use
Importance of securing loads on the road
Glasgow needs financial help to host full list of sports
Review transportation policies comprehensively

Others Also Read