Jump to Content Jump to Main Navigation

V National Court Interference: Anti-Arbitration Injunctions

Sabahi Rubins

From: Investor-State Arbitration (2nd Edition)

Borzu Sabahi, Noah Rubins, Don Wallace, Jr.

From: Investment Claims (http://oxia.ouplaw.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2021. All Rights Reserved. date: 19 October 2021

Subject(s):
Full protection and security — Relationship of international law & host state law

This chapter looks at the role of national courts in international arbitration. Arbitrators, as private persons, lack the coercive police power of the state. At various stages in the arbitration process, effective adjudication may therefore become difficult to achieve without implementation or the threat of implementation by a national court. International conventions are of some assistance in this regard, as the New York Convention and International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) Convention attempt to ensure court enforcement of arbitration agreements and final awards in most countries of the world. However, court interference slows the process, makes it more expensive, and can tilt the playing field if a party turns to its own national courts for support in an arbitrable dispute. The most extreme form of national court intervention in arbitral proceedings is an anti-arbitration injunction. The ICSID Convention contains specific additional protection from anti-arbitration injunctions and other types of interference by national courts.

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.