India: a late opening to the notion of international public policy?

Q3 Social Sciences
Abhisar Vidyarthi, Sikander Hyaat Khan
{"title":"India: a late opening to the notion of international public policy?","authors":"Abhisar Vidyarthi, Sikander Hyaat Khan","doi":"10.1093/arbint/aiac015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The New York Convention does not define the term public policy, and allows discretion to the member states to develop and apply their own notions of public policy. The development and evolution of public policy, at both national and international levels, have given rise to domestic and international interpretations of public policy. International public policy reflects only those notions of morality and justice that are relevant in the international context. It is widely recognized that domestic public policy should apply only to domestic awards, and states should endeavour to apply international public policy when dealing with the enforcement of foreign awards. While Indian courts do not make an explicit distinction between domestic and international public policy, they have traditionally been infamous for refusing enforcement to foreign awards based upon a broad public policy scrutiny. That said, in recent times, there has been a strong push to rectify India’s image by narrowly interpreting the scope of public policy applicable to foreign awards. This article examines whether the recent favourable changes in the judicial and legislative outlook towards public policy have opened the doors for the application of international public policy to the enforcement of foreign awards in India.","PeriodicalId":37425,"journal":{"name":"Arbitration International","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arbitration International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/arbint/aiac015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The New York Convention does not define the term public policy, and allows discretion to the member states to develop and apply their own notions of public policy. The development and evolution of public policy, at both national and international levels, have given rise to domestic and international interpretations of public policy. International public policy reflects only those notions of morality and justice that are relevant in the international context. It is widely recognized that domestic public policy should apply only to domestic awards, and states should endeavour to apply international public policy when dealing with the enforcement of foreign awards. While Indian courts do not make an explicit distinction between domestic and international public policy, they have traditionally been infamous for refusing enforcement to foreign awards based upon a broad public policy scrutiny. That said, in recent times, there has been a strong push to rectify India’s image by narrowly interpreting the scope of public policy applicable to foreign awards. This article examines whether the recent favourable changes in the judicial and legislative outlook towards public policy have opened the doors for the application of international public policy to the enforcement of foreign awards in India.
印度:国际公共政策概念的迟来的开放?
《纽约公约》没有对公共政策一词进行定义,并允许成员国自行制定和应用自己的公共政策概念。国家和国际两级公共政策的发展和演变产生了对公共政策的国内和国际解释。国际公共政策只反映在国际范围内有关的道德和正义观念。人们普遍认为,国内公共政策应仅适用于国内裁决,而各国在处理外国裁决的执行时应努力适用国际公共政策。虽然印度法院没有明确区分国内和国际公共政策,但它们历来因拒绝执行基于广泛公共政策审查的外国裁决而臭名昭著。话虽如此,最近有一股强烈的力量,通过狭隘地解释适用于外国奖项的公共政策范围,来纠正印度的形象。本文探讨了最近在司法和立法方面对公共政策前景的有利变化是否为在印度将国际公共政策应用于外国裁决的执行打开了大门。
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
Arbitration International
Arbitration International Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Launched in 1985, Arbitration International provides quarterly coverage for national and international developments in the world of arbitration. The journal aims to maintain balance between academic debate and practical contributions to the field, providing both topical material on current developments and analytic scholarship of permanent interest. Arbitrators, counsel, judges, scholars and government officials will find the journal enhances their understanding of a broad range of topics in commercial and investment arbitration. Features include (i) articles covering all major arbitration rules and national jurisdictions written by respected international practitioners and scholars, (ii) cutting edge (case) notes covering recent developments and ongoing debates in the field, (iii) book reviews of the latest publications in the world of arbitration, (iv) Letters to the Editor and (v) agora grouping articles related to a common theme. Arbitration International maintains a balance between controversial subjects for debate and topics geared toward practical use by arbitrators, lawyers, academics, judges, corporate advisors and government officials.
×
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