Užsienyje priimtam arbitražo sprendimui pripažinimas Lietuvos Respublikoje yra būtina sąlyga tam, kad būtų galima priversti pralaimėjusiąją šalį jį įvykdyti tuo atveju, jeigu kitoje valstybėje priimtas sprendimas yra nevykdomas, o turtas, iš kurio gali būti išieškoma, yra Lietuvos Respublikoje. Pirmoje magistro baigiamojo darbo dalyje siekiama atskleisti arbitražo sprendimo ir užsienio arbitražo sprendimo sąvokas. Nustačius šias sąvokas, toliau analizuojama užsienio arbitražo sprendimo pripažinimo samprata, trumpai aptariamas jos atskyrimas nuo užsienio arbitražo sprendimo vykdymo sąvokos. Galiausiai aptariama specifinė teisės doktrinos diskusija, ar Niujorko konvencija gali būti taikoma tik galutiniams užsienio arbitražo sprendimams, ar ir negalutinių sprendimų rūšims, visų pirma, tarpiniams (procesiniams) sprendimams dėl laikinųjų apsaugos priemonių taikymo. Antroje darbo dalyje pirmiausia aptariami užsienio arbitražo sprendimų pripažinimą reglamentuojantys teisės šaltiniai ir jų teisinė galia Lietuvos Respublikoje, be abejonės, ypatingas dėmesys skiriamas 1958 metų Niujorko konvencijai dėl užsienio arbitražų sprendimų pripažinimo ir vykdymo. Vėliau analizuojama šiuo metu esanti užsienio arbitražų sprendimų pripažinimo procedūra Lietuvos Respublikos teismuose bei galimi tvarkos pasikeitimai, jeigu Lietuvos Respublikos Seime būtų priimtas Civilinio proceso kodekso pakeitimo ir papildymo įstatymo projektas. Paskutinėje dalyje aptariamos 2007 – 2010 metų... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / The recognition of the foreign arbitral awards in the Republic of Lithuania is the main requirement for the enforcement of the foreign arbitral award in case the respondent fails to execute the award of the arbitral tribunal in goodwill. Firstly, the author seeks to disclose the concepts of the arbitral award and foreign arbitral award. In accordance with the before mentioned terms, the notion of the recognition foreign arbitration award is analized and distinguished from the concept of the enforcement of the foreign arbitral awards. Finally, the discussion of whether the New York Convention may be applied only to the final foreign arbitral awards is revealed. In the second part of the mater thesis the law governing the recognition of foreign arbitral awards is analized. Special attention is given to the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. Later analysis reflects the proceedings of the recognition of foreign arbitral awards before the courts of the Republic of Lithuania as well as possible changes, if the Lithuanian Parliament adoptes the amendments of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Republic of Lithuania. The final section deals with the recent case law of the Court of Appeal of Lithuania and the Supreme Court of Lithuania on matters of recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. At the end of the theses the final conclusions indicate significant problems of the recognition of the... [to full text]

Diferentemente do que ocorre na área pública, na qual tanto a Corte Internacional de Justiça (CIJ) quanto a Dispute Solution Board (DSB) da OMC estão aptas a solucionar os conflitos internacionais públicos, na área jurídica privada não é viável, no mundo contemporâneo, imaginar a existência de um modelo supranacional e global para a solução de litígios privados internacionais que se guiasse por normas processuais próprias e aplicasse normas materiais unificadas internacionalmente. Assim, cada país estabelece seu poder jurisdicional dentro de seu próprio território e nos limites postos pelo direito internacional, de modo que, atualmente, exceto nos casos em que se convencionar a solução do conflito pela via da arbitragem, será sempre um tribunal nacional que decidirá o litígio de caráter internacional. Haverá, evidentemente, casos em que as decisões proferidas em tribunais nacionais não apresentarão aptidão para garantir a efetivação dos interesses tutelados, fazendo-se necessário que parte ou a totalidade dos efeitos práticos da sentença sejam produzidos em outros sistemas jurídicos, ocasião em que, salvo convenções e tratados internacionais, haverá a necessidade de seu reconhecimento, por meio do processo de homologação, para que possa ser executada. Busca este trabalho demonstrar que nem todos os efeitos da sentença dependem do procedimento de homologação para que se manifestem. Por outro lado, a Lei de Arbitragem, ao equiparar em efeitos laudos arbitrais a sentenças estatais, consequentemente impõe ao laudo arbitral estrangeiro o seu reconhecimento por meio do processo de homologação pelo Superior Tribunal de Justiça, para que, só então, possa ser executado. Tal medida legislativa parece desconsiderar a distinção entre sentença judicial e laudo arbitral, este de natureza privada, que não decorre da prestação jurisdicional de um Estado, mas sim proferido por pessoas despidas de qualquer autoridade pública, cujo poder jurisdicional provém de convenção privada das partes. Em resposta a essa situação, propõe-se este trabalho demonstrar a diferença entre laudo e sentença, no intuito de eliminar a exigência legal da homologação dos laudos arbitrais estrangeiros pelo Superior Tribunal de Justiça, sem contudo retirar-lhes os efeitos, o que se daria pela limitação das matérias de defesa no processo de execução de títulos executivos extrajudiciais / Differently of what it happens in the public area, in the which both the International Court of Justice (CIJ) and the Dispute Solution Board (DSB) of OMC are capable to solve the public international conflicts, in the private juridical area it is not viable, in the contemporary world, to imagine the existence of a supranational and global model for the solution of private international litigations guided by own procedural norms and applied material norms internationally unified. Thus, each country establishes its jurisdictional power inside its own territory and into the limits put by the international law, so that, now, except in the cases that the solution of the conflict is stipulated by the means of arbitration, it will always be a national court that will decide the international litigations. There will be, evidently, cases in which the pronounced decisions by national courts wil not present aptitude to guarantee the efectiveness of the tutored interests, being necessary that part or the totality of the practical effects of the sentence are produced in other juridical systems, occasion in that, except for conventions and international agreements, there will be the need of its recognition, through the approval process, so that it can be executed. This work aims to demonstrate that not all the effects of the sentence depend on the approval procedure to be shown. On the other hand, the Law of Arbitration, when matching in effects arbitral awards to public sentences, consequently imposes to the foreign arbitral award its recognition by the means of the approval process by the Superior Tribunal of Justice, so that, only then, it can be executed. Such a legislative measure seems to disrespect the distinction between judicial sentence and arbitral award, this of private nature, that doesnt elapse from the jurisditional rendering of a State, but is pronounced by people without any public authority, whose jurisdictional power comes from the private convention of the parts. In response to that situation, this work intends to demonstrate the difference between arbitral award and sentence, in the intention to eliminate the legal demand of the approval of the foreign arbitral awards by the Superior Tribunal of Justice, without however removing their effects, what would de done by the limitation of the defense matters in the process of execution of extrajudicial executive titles.

Diferentemente do que ocorre na área pública, na qual tanto a Corte Internacional de Justiça (CIJ) quanto a Dispute Solution Board (DSB) da OMC estão aptas a solucionar os conflitos internacionais públicos, na área jurídica privada não é viável, no mundo contemporâneo, imaginar a existência de um modelo supranacional e global para a solução de litígios privados internacionais que se guiasse por normas processuais próprias e aplicasse normas materiais unificadas internacionalmente. Assim, cada país estabelece seu poder jurisdicional dentro de seu próprio território e nos limites postos pelo direito internacional, de modo que, atualmente, exceto nos casos em que se convencionar a solução do conflito pela via da arbitragem, será sempre um tribunal nacional que decidirá o litígio de caráter internacional. Haverá, evidentemente, casos em que as decisões proferidas em tribunais nacionais não apresentarão aptidão para garantir a efetivação dos interesses tutelados, fazendo-se necessário que parte ou a totalidade dos efeitos práticos da sentença sejam produzidos em outros sistemas jurídicos, ocasião em que, salvo convenções e tratados internacionais, haverá a necessidade de seu reconhecimento, por meio do processo de homologação, para que possa ser executada. Busca este trabalho demonstrar que nem todos os efeitos da sentença dependem do procedimento de homologação para que se manifestem. Por outro lado, a Lei de Arbitragem, ao equiparar em efeitos laudos arbitrais a sentenças estatais, consequentemente impõe ao laudo arbitral estrangeiro o seu reconhecimento por meio do processo de homologação pelo Superior Tribunal de Justiça, para que, só então, possa ser executado. Tal medida legislativa parece desconsiderar a distinção entre sentença judicial e laudo arbitral, este de natureza privada, que não decorre da prestação jurisdicional de um Estado, mas sim proferido por pessoas despidas de qualquer autoridade pública, cujo poder jurisdicional provém de convenção privada das partes. Em resposta a essa situação, propõe-se este trabalho demonstrar a diferença entre laudo e sentença, no intuito de eliminar a exigência legal da homologação dos laudos arbitrais estrangeiros pelo Superior Tribunal de Justiça, sem contudo retirar-lhes os efeitos, o que se daria pela limitação das matérias de defesa no processo de execução de títulos executivos extrajudiciais / Differently of what it happens in the public area, in the which both the International Court of Justice (CIJ) and the Dispute Solution Board (DSB) of OMC are capable to solve the public international conflicts, in the private juridical area it is not viable, in the contemporary world, to imagine the existence of a supranational and global model for the solution of private international litigations guided by own procedural norms and applied material norms internationally unified. Thus, each country establishes its jurisdictional power inside its own territory and into the limits put by the international law, so that, now, except in the cases that the solution of the conflict is stipulated by the means of arbitration, it will always be a national court that will decide the international litigations. There will be, evidently, cases in which the pronounced decisions by national courts wil not present aptitude to guarantee the efectiveness of the tutored interests, being necessary that part or the totality of the practical effects of the sentence are produced in other juridical systems, occasion in that, except for conventions and international agreements, there will be the need of its recognition, through the approval process, so that it can be executed. This work aims to demonstrate that not all the effects of the sentence depend on the approval procedure to be shown. On the other hand, the Law of Arbitration, when matching in effects arbitral awards to public sentences, consequently imposes to the foreign arbitral award its recognition by the means of the approval process by the Superior Tribunal of Justice, so that, only then, it can be executed. Such a legislative measure seems to disrespect the distinction between judicial sentence and arbitral award, this of private nature, that doesnt elapse from the jurisditional rendering of a State, but is pronounced by people without any public authority, whose jurisdictional power comes from the private convention of the parts. In response to that situation, this work intends to demonstrate the difference between arbitral award and sentence, in the intention to eliminate the legal demand of the approval of the foreign arbitral awards by the Superior Tribunal of Justice, without however removing their effects, what would de done by the limitation of the defense matters in the process of execution of extrajudicial executive titles.

1 Abstract: Czech and foreign arbitral award The purpose of this thesis is to describe and compare the position of Czech and foreign arbitral award in the Czech legislation. The author aims to clarify whether the Czech legislation grants to foreign arbitral awards the same possibility of enforcement as it grants, if the same conditions are met, to Czech arbitral awards. This thesis should also answer whether the decision-making practice of Czech courts is not in conflict with international obligations. The thesis is divided into five parts. The first part is dedicated to general questions of arbitration. The purpose of this section is to introduce arbitration as an alternative method of dispute resolution. The author analyses the use of arbitration by describing its advantages and disadvantages. Further attention is paid to the main institutes of arbitration such as arbitrability of the dispute. The second part deals with the most important sources of law governing arbitration. For unambiguous application of sources of law, the author also deals with conflicts between different sources of law, for example in the form of a conflict of a multilateral international treaty with a bilateral international treaty on legal aid. The third part the author dedicates to the arbitral award itself. It deals with its...

Esta dissertação analisa a exceção de ofensa à ordem pública como causa de recusa do reconhecimento e/ou execução da sentença arbitral estrangeira. Busca-se inicialmente determinar o conceito de ordem pública e sua extensão. Antes disso, contudo, elabora-se um breve panorama sobre sentença estrangeira e arbitragem comercial internacional, faz-se um apanhado histórico da homologação de sentença estrangeira no Brasil, analisa-se os aspectos gerais da homologação de sentenças arbitrais estrangeiras, as normas de origem interna e os tratados internacionais com vigência no Brasil, o procedimento homologatório e os pressupostos positivos e negativos da homologação. Após, analisa-se a ordem pública interna, internacional e transnacional, assim como a ordem pública processual e material. Em seguida, examina-se a extensão que a doutrina e a jurisprudência têm conferido ao conceito de ordem pública de que trata o art. V (2) (b) da Convenção de Nova Iorque e o art. 39, II da Lei nº. 9.307/96. Posteriormente, analisa-se alguns temas que já suscitaram questionamentos de ofensa à ordem pública, os casos já julgados pelo STF e STJ de homologação de sentenças arbitrais estrangeiras com alegação de ofensa à ordem pública e como o posicionamento do Judiciário, sob o enfoque da Análise Econômica do Direito, afeta os custos de transação dos negócios comerciais. Defende-se ao final do trabalho a necessidade de se restringir o campo de aplicação e o alcance dos questionamentos de ofensa à ordem pública. O objetivo do estudo é demonstrar que a ordem pública deve ser interpretada restritivamente e que a intervenção deve ser excepcional. / This Masters degree thesis analyzes the exception given to public policy offenses as a cause for the refusal of recognition and/or enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. This research initially attempts to define the concept of public policy and its extension. Prior to that, however, a brief analysis of foreign awards and international commercial arbitration as well as a historical overview of homologation in Brazil are drawn, and the general aspects of the recognition of foreign arbitral awards and the internal rules and international treaties which are effective in Brazil, the homologation proceeding itself, and both the positive and negative aspects of homologations are analyzed. Afterwards, the domestic, international and transnational public policies are analyzed, as well as the procedural and material public policy. Following, the meaning that the doctrine and jurisprudence have given to the concept of public policy presented in the Article V (2) (b) of the New York Convention, and in the Article 39 of Law No. II. 9.307/96 is examined. Later, some issues that have raised questionings related to public policy offenses are analyzed, as well as the cases already ruled by the Brazilian Supreme Court and the Superior Court of Justice for the homologation of foreign arbitral awards with alleged public order offenses and how the position of the judiciary, from the perspective of Economic Analysis of Law, affects transaction costs of business affairs. Finally, the need to limit both the scope of applications and the range of questionings concerning public policy offenses is defended. The main goal of this study is to demonstrate that public policy shall be strictly interpreted and that intervention must be exceptional.

This study is concerned with the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards under the relevant regimes in the GCC states, both local law and international conventions. The easy enforceability of arbitral awards is considered one of the main factors in the success of international commercial arbitration. Thus this thesis not only attempts a comprehensive analysis of the requirements of and procedures for recognition and enforcement of foreign awards in the GCC States, but also evaluates whether the GCC’s laws and practices comply with best international practice standards, especially as embodied in the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. The thesis comprises of seven chapters. The first chapter examines the legal framework of the GCC States, and provides a brief history of the rules governing arbitration and the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. Chapter two looks at general principles regarding recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. Chapter three covers jurisdictional elements in the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards in the GCC States. Chapter four examines the procedural steps demanded by each state for the enforcement of an award, looking particularly at the impact of relevant international conventions on these issues. Chapter five deals with the evidence which must be tendered and the conditions that must be satisfied in order to obtain the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in the GCC States. Chapter six examines the grounds on which a respondent may apply to dismiss an application for recognition and enforcement of a foreign arbitral award. Chapter seven then deals with the grounds on which a foreign arbitral award must be refused enforcement. The concluding chapter summarises the problems thrown up by the study, and suggests a common way forward for the legal systems of the states of the Arabian Gulf in dealing with these issues.

Arbitration proceedings as a means of dispute resolution in international law with regard to the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards Resumé Arbitration as a method of settlement of disputes settlement has enjoyed growing popularity in recent several years. Arbitration stands between other alternative means of dispute settlement and the common court trial as a alternative dispute resolution. Although negotiation, good offices, mediation, conciliation, inquiry, mini-trial, medarb or meadaloa are often used forms of the dispute settlement their awards cannot be enforced by the state authority. Those means are popular mainly in the business field where the parties are interested in the cooperation and where they aim to clear up some misunderstanding or technical problems rather than solve major disputes between them. While the dispute should be solved by the binding way the parties would choose the arbitration as a legally framed procedure. Arbitral awards are then able to be enforced and the parties also have more exact boundaries for the whole procedure. However, there is no unified definition of the arbitration, it could be described as a legal technique where the parties bring claim before one or more neutral persons (arbiters or arbitral tribunal) by whose award the parties agree to be...