Aligning State Sovereignty with Transnational Public Policy

L. Trakman
{"title":"Aligning State Sovereignty with Transnational Public Policy","authors":"L. Trakman","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3301024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The rationale for “delocalizing” transnational public policy is not that domestic authorities lack the capacity to delineate the scope of transnational public policy. Rather it is that the public policy that is articulated solely through a domestic judicial lens can be fractionalized as national courts internalize public policy differently to comport with their discrete and sometimes conflicting domestic requirements. This Article uses controversial litigation in the United States and Russia to illustrate the disturbing ripple effect of domestic courts declining to enforce foreign judgments that have annulled arbitration awards. It proposes a way for domestic judges to apply transnational public policy to international commercial transactions, without displacing or circumventing domestic public policy. It applies this analysis to the “public policy exception” by which domestic judges decline to recognize and enforce international arbitration awards under the New York Convention.","PeriodicalId":313622,"journal":{"name":"Transnational Litigation/Arbitration","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transnational Litigation/Arbitration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3301024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The rationale for “delocalizing” transnational public policy is not that domestic authorities lack the capacity to delineate the scope of transnational public policy. Rather it is that the public policy that is articulated solely through a domestic judicial lens can be fractionalized as national courts internalize public policy differently to comport with their discrete and sometimes conflicting domestic requirements. This Article uses controversial litigation in the United States and Russia to illustrate the disturbing ripple effect of domestic courts declining to enforce foreign judgments that have annulled arbitration awards. It proposes a way for domestic judges to apply transnational public policy to international commercial transactions, without displacing or circumventing domestic public policy. It applies this analysis to the “public policy exception” by which domestic judges decline to recognize and enforce international arbitration awards under the New York Convention.
国家主权与跨国公共政策的协调
跨国公共政策“非本地化”的理由并不是国内当局缺乏划定跨国公共政策范围的能力。相反,仅仅通过国内司法角度阐述的公共政策可以被分割,因为国家法院以不同的方式将公共政策内部化,以适应其离散的、有时相互冲突的国内要求。本文以美国和俄罗斯有争议的诉讼为例,说明国内法院拒绝执行已宣布仲裁裁决无效的外国判决所产生的令人不安的连锁反应。它提出了一种国内法官在不取代或规避国内公共政策的情况下将跨国公共政策适用于国际商业交易的方法。本文将这一分析应用于“公共政策例外”,即国内法官拒绝承认和执行《纽约公约》下的国际仲裁裁决。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信