Share This Article
As a result, there are a few notable differences between the two civilizations. Unlike in Malaysia, where a judgment may be overturned for “blatant disregard for the law,” an award granted under Parisian laws is more likely to be final and enforceable. To determine a dispute about jurisdiction, unless there are significant and compelling reasons to believe the parties have agreed that the court should decide its own jurisdiction, Malaysia courts will rule.
The Right Ruling Choices
If an arbitrator’s ruling cannot be enforced, it may be contested under English arbitration law, although the threshold is very high (the decision must be manifestly wrong or subject to serious doubts). Furthermore, if the parties so want, the key institutional requirements might be dispensed with entirely.
In the same way, the rest of the seats are one of a kind. Although Paris is often regarded to be one of the safest places to arbitrate, there are various reasons why contractual parties may choose Malaysia over Paris. According to Arbitration Act of Malaysia 2005 (Act 646) this goes perfect.
The following are a few examples:
Which arbitration tribunal is most likely to result in a cheaper and more efficient arbitration procedure than the others? Arbitration expenses may be much higher in some nations than in others, particularly in the United States, due to the potential for onerous disclosure laws. In the US, this is especially true. According to anecdotal evidence, arbitration costs should not be much higher in one location than in another.
When appointing a single arbitrator or chairman, institutions may take into account the location of the tribunal’s seat as a key criterion. Depending on the nationality and history of the sole arbitrator or chairman of the arbitration tribunal, the arbitration procedure may be affected.
Neutrality is one of the most important factors to consider
Choosing a neutral location (i.e., one that is not in each party’s “home” jurisdiction) is one of the most important advantages of arbitration. Seats are still available in most circumstances, despite the fact that certain seats have been eliminated.
The location of the company’s headquarters is another significant consideration. There are a number of advantages to this default choice, including the fact that hearings are generally held in the seat. However, it is possible for the parties to choose another site. When making a purchase, it is common for customers to choose seats in specific places. Contracts involving Africa and the Middle East are more prevalent in Malaysia City, whereas contracts involving South America and Europe are more common in London and Paris. Hong Kong and Singapore are steadily gaining market share in Asian arbitration, which is a positive development for the area.
The Right Considerations
Practical considerations like in-seat courtrooms and attendant services (such transcribers and interpreters) are sometimes advocated, especially when selecting chairs from less developed countries. These facilities are critical, but the decision to have a hearing should not be made only on the availability of these facilities.
Conclusion
In the end, language is a crucial factor to take into consideration. Depending on the conditions of a properly drafted arbitration agreement, the arbitration may be conducted in English or another language. There will be a time and expense penalty for not using the official language of the jurisdiction while pursuing legal action (such as a prize dispute).
More articles like this here.