Annulment of Arbitral Awards on the Basis of “Manifest Disregard of Law Doctrine” in U.S. Law; with a Look at Iranian Law

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, University of Tehran,

2 Master of Private Law, University of Tehran

10.22034/law.2023.56063.3260

Abstract

A certain limit of judicial review of arbitral awards is accepted in national legal systems and international instruments. The main and universally agreed grounds for reviewing arbitral awards include procedural and jurisdictional integrity and public policy considerations. However, some legal systems review the application of governing law to prevent egregious errors of law by arbitrators. Such a ground for reviewing arbitral awards, because of connection to the substantial aspect of arbitral awards is contentious and subject to conflicting views. The doctrine of manifest disregard of law in U.S. law, with specific criteria, provides an exceptional ground for reviewing arbitral awards from the perspective of complying with and correct application of governing law. In this research, with study of the concept and criteria and evaluating usefulness of this doctrine, it reveals that reviewing arbitral awards for complying with governing law at a minimum level with specific and narrow criteria can enhance predictability and rule of law in arbitration and at the same time preserve finality and minimal intervention of courts in arbitration. The aforementioned doctrine and the criteria of its application in U.S. law can be useful in interpretation or amendment of Iranian arbitration regulations in connection with such a ground for reviewing arbitral awards, and especially the first paragraph of Article 489 of Iranian Civil Procedure Code.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. الف) فارسی

    - کتاب‌ها

    1. امامی، سید حسن (1371). حقوق مدنی، تهران: انتشارات اسلامیه.
    2. جعفری لنگرودی، محمدجعفر (1397). ترمینولوژی حقوقی، تهران: گنج دانش.
    3. جنیدی، لعیا (1395). اجرای آرای داوری بازرگانی خارجی، تهران: شهردانش.
    4. حدادی، مهدی (1400). داوری بین المللی در نظام حقوقی ایران، تهران: مجد.
    5. خدابخشی، عبدالله (1400). حقوق داوری و دعاوی مربوط به آن در رویۀ قضایی، تهران: شرکت سهامی‌انتشار.
    6. شمس، عبدالله (1396). آیین دادرسی مدنی (دورۀ پیشرفته)، تهران: دراک.
    7. شیروی، عبدالحسین (1392). داوری تجاری بین‌المللی، تهران: سمت.
    8. فضلی، حسن (1400). تحلیل آیین دادرسی و جهات ابطال رأی داوری، تهران: انتشارات دادگستری استان تهران.

    - مقالات

    1. منصوری، عباس و امینی، عیسی (1400). محدودة نظارت دادگاه بر رأی داوری داخلی از حیث رعایت قوانین موجد حق با تکیه بر رویة قضایی. پژوهش حقوق خصوصی، 10 (36). ص 147-123.  Doi: 10.22054/jplr.2019.43299.2230
    2. غمامی، مجید (1401). جستاری تطبیقی در اوصاف نظام دادرسی مطلوب. مطالعات حقوق تطبیقی معاصر، 13 (27). ص 170-149. Doi: 10.22034/law.2021.46656.2929

    ب) منابع انگلیسی

    -books

    • Park, William W. (2006). Arbitration of International Business Disputes, New York: Oxford University Press.
    • Rowley QC, J William (2019). The Guide to Challenging and Enforcing Arbitration Awards, London: Law Business Research Ltd.
    • Wiliński, Piotr, (2019). Excess of Powers in International Commercial Arbitration, The Hague: Eleven International Publishing.

    - Articles

    • Aragaki, Hiro N. (2009). The Mess of Manifest Disregard, The Yale Law Journal, 191(1).
    • Brown, Matthew J. (2013). Final Awards Reconceptualized: A Proposal to Resolve the Hall Street Circuit Split, Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal, 13.
    • Burch, Thomas V. (2010). Manifest Disregard and the Imperfect Procedural Justice of Arbitration, Kansas Law Review, 59.
    • Chen, Annie (2008). The Doctrine of Manifest Disregard of the Law after Hall Street: Implications for Judicial Review of International Arbitrations in U.S. Courts, Fordham International Law Journal, 32 (6).
    • Cole, Sarah Rudolph (2016). Curbing the Runaway Arbitrator in Commercial Arbitration: Making Exceeding the Powers Count, Ohio State Public Law, 344.
    • Drahozal, Christopher R. & Ware, Stephen J. (2010). Why do Businesses Use (or not Use) Arbitration Clauses?, Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution, 25(2).
    • Drahozal, Christopher R. (2007). Codifying Manifest Disregard, Nevada Law Journal, 8.
    • Graff, David (2008). The Helmsley Case: An Illustration of the Confused State of the Law Surrounding the Manifest Disregard of Law Doctrine as Applied to Arbitration, Touro law review,
    • Gross, Jill I. (2099). Hall Street Blues: The Uncertain Future of Manifest Disregard, Securities Regulation Law Journal 37(3).
    • Gurian, Nico (2017). Rethinking Judicial Review of Arbitration, Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems, 50.
    • Ha, Choong-Lyong (2020). The Finality of Arbitral Awards: The U.S. Practices, Journal of Arbitration Studies, 30 (3).
    • Hayford, Stephen L. (1998). Reining in the Manifest Disregard of the Law Standard: The Key to Restoring Order to the Law of Vacatur, Journal of Dispute Resolution, 1998 (2).
    • Kennedy, Kate (2007). Manifest Disregard in Arbitration Awards: A Manifestation of Appeals versus a Disregard for Just Resolutions, Journal of Law and Policy, 16.
    • Larson, Caroline (2018). Substantive Fairness in International Commercial Arbitration: Achievable through an Arbitral Appeals Process? Arbitration: The International Journal of Arbitration, Mediation and Dispute Management, 84 (2).
    • O’Mullan, Michael P. (1995). Seeking Consistency in Judicial Review of Securities Arbitration: An Analysis of the Manifest Disregard of the Law Standard, Fordham L. Rev., 64 (3)
    • Pivateau, Griffin Toronjo, Reconsidering Arbitration: Evaluating the Future of the Manifest Disregard Standard, Available at:

    Doi: 10.2139/ssrn.1649093.  

    • Reuben, Richard C. (2009). Personal Autonomy and Vacatur After Hall Street, Penn State Law Review, 113.
    • Rubins, Noah (2001). Manifest Disregard of the Law" and Vacatur of Arbitral Awards in the United States, American Review of International Arbitration, 12.
    • Sims, MyLinda Kay; Bales, Richard A. (2012). Much Ado About Nothing: The Future of Manifest Disregard after Hall Street, South Carolina Law Review, 62.
    • Stinson, Judith M. (2010). Why Dicta Becomes Holding and Why it Matters, Brooklyn law review, 76 (1).
    • Strickland, Henry C. (1992). The Federal Arbitration Act's Interstate Commerce Requirement: What's Left for State Arbitration Law? Hofstra Law Review, 21 (2).
    • Tompkins, Jonathan J. (2018). Manifest Disregard of the Law: The Continuing Evolution of an Historically Ambiguous Vacatur Standard, Dispute Resolution International, 12 (2).
    • Ware, Stephen J. (2014). Vacating Legally-Erroneous Arbitration Awards, Yearbook on Arbitration and Mediation 56 (6).
    • Weiskopf, Nicholas R. (2007). Arbitral Injustice Rethinking the Manifest Disregard Standard for Judicial Review of Awards, The University of Louisville Law Review, 46.
    • Weston, Maureen A. (2010). The Other Avenues of Hall Street and Prospects for Judicial Review of Arbitral Awards, Lewis & Clark Law Review,
Jurisprudence and Islamic Law
Volume 14, Issue 33
December 2024
Pages 169-199

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics