In any arbitration, the parties’ choice of seat normally determines the legal regime under which an arbitration is conducted and any award is enforced. Accustomed to the international “seat standard,” one might think that an ICC arbitration award rendered in China, for example, would be subject to confirmation or set aside in Chinese court pursuant…

In Part I of our post, we discussed the long-standing uncertainties existing in China about what legal regime governs arbitrations administered by foreign arbitral institutions. We also introduced the recent, groundbreaking ruling by the Guangzhou Court in Brentwood v. Guangdong Fa’anlong. Here in Part II, we further discuss whether China might adopt the internationally-accepted “seat…

Introduction In international arbitration, winning an award is not the end of the story.  Instead, a favorable business outcome depends on successful enforcement of the award in the jurisdiction(s) where the opponent’s assets are situated.  Unfortunately for the winning party, the losing party may delay or even avoid enforcement by raising challenges and instigating proceedings…

Introduction Parties to international commercial transactions not infrequently find themselves in disputes over whether a valid arbitration agreement exists between them or whether a court or an arbitral tribunal has the jurisdiction to hear this issue. These situations are especially perplexing because – despite the general international acceptance of the “kompetenz-kompetenz” doctrine – national laws…