Introduction

Enforcement of arbitral awards against a losing party who refuses to comply voluntarily with the award is consistent with the mutual intention of the parties to resolve their differences through arbitration and be bound by the resulting award. In this respect, judicial assistance ensures the effectiveness of arbitration as a private arrangement supported by national and international legal order. Thus, the ability to enforce arbitral awards obtained in one country within the jurisdiction of another country is a significant catalyst for the success of international trade and commerce. The New York Convention which facilitates this objective, nonetheless, contains normative grounds upon which enforcement courts may exercise discretion to refuse enforcement.

One of the most complex challenges of enforcement of awards arises when an award is annulled or set aside at the seat of arbitration. While some jurisdictions uphold such annulments, others may still recognize and enforce the award, leading to legal uncertainties and jurisdictional conflicts. This article explores the challenges surrounding the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, particularly in cases where the award has been annulled at the seat, and examines the divergent approaches taken by courts worldwide.