{"title":"纽约公约》:法院如何解释裁决的管辖权--美国视角","authors":"Tong Wang","doi":"10.1002/alt.22028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>There has been a significant body of U.S. federal case law where jurisdictional issues concerning the 1958 Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards have been litigated in the U.S. This article focuses on federal courts' interpretation on certain—not all—of those jurisdictional issues in connection with the Federal Arbitration Act—state law and state courts are out of the scope of this article.</p>","PeriodicalId":100074,"journal":{"name":"Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation","volume":"42 1","pages":"9-12"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The New York Convention: How Courts Interpret Jurisdiction on Awards—A U.S. Perspective\",\"authors\":\"Tong Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/alt.22028\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>There has been a significant body of U.S. federal case law where jurisdictional issues concerning the 1958 Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards have been litigated in the U.S. This article focuses on federal courts' interpretation on certain—not all—of those jurisdictional issues in connection with the Federal Arbitration Act—state law and state courts are out of the scope of this article.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100074,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"9-12\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alt.22028\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alt.22028","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
The New York Convention: How Courts Interpret Jurisdiction on Awards—A U.S. Perspective
There has been a significant body of U.S. federal case law where jurisdictional issues concerning the 1958 Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards have been litigated in the U.S. This article focuses on federal courts' interpretation on certain—not all—of those jurisdictional issues in connection with the Federal Arbitration Act—state law and state courts are out of the scope of this article.