CEU Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2018
| Author | Diguma, Gelila Haile |
|---|---|
| Title | Judicial Review of Arbitral Awards by Courts as a means of Remedy: a Comparative Analysis of the laws of Ethiopia, the United Kingdom and the United States |
| Summary | Arbitration, which is a private adjudication modality, is one of the oldest means of dispute resolution. When selecting arbitration, parties take into consideration several of its advantages; some of which are confidentiality, analysis of the issue at hand by arbitrators who are experts in certain fields and finality of an award. By selecting arbitration, parties exclude the state’s intervention in the settlement of their dispute. It can be argued that the two most important inherent features of arbitration are finality and party autonomy. That said, courts of different jurisdiction might find it upon themselves to interfere in this dispute settlement mechanism, one way or another. States put in place a review and/or appeal mechanism for different policy considerations. However, it can be agreed that the review of courts on arbitration awards should be limited and proportional to the benefit the state is seeking to achieve. It should not, in any way, frustrate the foremost benefit of arbitration, i.e. effective settlement of disputes. This short thesis looks into the arbitration laws of Ethiopia, United Kingdom and the United States and provides a comparative analysis on the modalities and justification of courts interference and the extent of their judicial review powers. It analyses, amongst other things, how much interference from national courts is considered reasonable. |
| Supervisor | Petsche, Markus |
| Department | Legal Studies LLM |
| Full text | https://www.etd.ceu.edu/2018/diguma_gelila.pdf |
Visit the CEU Library.
© 2007-2021, Central European University