International Commercial Arbitration

International Commercial Arbitration

 

Chapter One

Introduction

  • Background to the study

There are basically four processes of solving disputes. These include negotiation, mediation, arbitration and adjudication.[1] In negotiation, parties to the dispute directly discuss the problem with a view to agreeing on a settlement.[2] On its part, mediation involves the voluntary intervention of a third party who assists the parties to a dispute in finding a solution. The voluntary third party must not be a party to the dispute. Mediation has sometimes been referred to as conciliation and is underpinned by the voluntary third party intervention. Under arbitration, the parties to a dispute agree to submit their dispute to a third person and to abide by the decision of that third person.[3] Parties to a dispute also submit their disputes to a third party in adjudication except that the party is often a court of law or other governmental authority such that the decision reached is binding on the disputants simply by virtue of the law and not any consent to be so bound.[4]As the figure 1 below shows, these processes of dispute resolution form a continuum staring from negotiation and moving towards adjudication. Parties to the dispute become less and less in control of their dispute resolution as one moves across the continuum towards adjudication.

Negotiation                    Mediation                                Arbitration                             Adjudication

 

 

 

Figure 1: The Continuum of dispute resolution mechanisms

Whatever the particular process, it is important that it be effective as measured on its ability to satisfy a host of factors. This is particularly important in the context international commercial transactions. The decision to opt for any of the four processes in international commercial disputes will be contingent on a multiplicity of factors. At least eight (8) qualities can be singled out as necessary for an appropriate mechanism for solving international commercial disputes.[5]

The first of these qualities is an element of certainty in the sense that only ascertainable legal principles should be applied in resolving the dispute. This requirement is much easier to legal systems that rely on precedents. Certainty makes it possible for parties in commercial transactions to arrange their affairs in legally defensible ways. The absence of artificial barriers, sometimes referred to accessibility, is the second quality of an appropriate dispute resolution mechanism.[6]Parties to commercial disputes would rarely choose a mechanism fraught with artificial barriers. Thirdly, the appropriate mechanism should be predictable in the sense that parties to the dispute can know the procedures well in advance of submitting their dispute to a mechanism. In addition, the mechanism should have an effective outcome which may sometimes call for an effective enforcement mechanism should a party not want to honour an outcome. The other qualities in summary are transparency, independence, efficient case management as well as cost efficiency.[7]

As a means of resolving international commercial disputes, arbitration is increasingly gaining prominence.[8] A 2015 survey by the International Bar Association (IBA) found that the use of arbitration as a means of resolving international commercial disputes is on the rise.[9] The rise in international commercial arbitration is part of the wider trend of the growth of international commerce. It was inevitable that the growth in cross-border transactions would in turn lead to the growth in cross-border disputes.[10] The corresponding increase in international arbitration can be seen as an indicator that parties to these transactions prefer arbitration as a means of resolving their disputes.[11]Given the choice, parties to cross-border commercial transactions would be hesitant in subjecting the resolution of their disputes to the national courts of the opposing party. Unfamiliarity with the other law, language and culture would definitely skew the preference away from adjudication in the respective national courts.[12]

Countries in the Middle East (ME) such as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and even Bahrain have not been left behind in these developments in the international sphere. The 2014 value of exports as measured in United States (U.S) from both the UAE and Saudi Arabia amounted to 360 and 354 billions respectively.[13] These figures roughly represented 1.9% of global merchandise export for each of the two countries.[14] As insignificant as it might appear when expressed in terms of percentages, both the UAE and Saudi Arabia also ranked position 16 and 17 respectively among leading exporters of merchandise. It is instructive to point out that the economies of the gulf countries have largely been supported by oil exports. A country’s increasing participation in international trade comes with the need to have appropriate dispute resolution mechanisms if that country is to attract more international trade.

  • Problem statement and research questions

With the acknowledgement that international commercial arbitration is increasingly becoming more common even in the gulf countries like Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain all stakeholders must begin to contend with important questions that arise whenever considerations of appropriate dispute resolution mechanisms are made.  One such question is the availability of an effective enforcement mechanism. This is a particularly pertinent question given the efforts in the three countries to position themselves as reliable international trade destinations. Although increasingly beginning to change, a common feature of the gulf economies is their heavy reliance on hydrocarbons.[15] Economic theory posits that natural resource windfalls are often associated with the weakening of other sectors of the economy.[16] It is perhaps in the quest to mitigate this risk that the authorities in Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain are eager to diversify their economies.

The long term national development plans of the three countries are just some of the evidence that these countries are serious with integrating with the world economy. On April 25 2016, the Saudi cabinet approved the country’s long-term development plan dubbed Vision 2030.[17] Among the key themes of that vision is to make Saudi Arabia ‘‘a thriving economy open for business.[18]’’ At a cabinet meeting back in 2010, the UAE Vision 2021 was launched by H.E Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum.[19] Amongst others, the national agenda in the UAE Vision 2021 is to make the country a ‘‘competitive knowledge economy.’’[20] With its Economic Vision 2030(EV2030) launched in 2008, Bahrain is definitely not behind in this trend.[21] Like the visions of her counterparts, Bahrain EV 2030 places significant emphasis on competitiveness.

With ‘‘a thriving economy open for business’’ in the case of Saudi Arabia, ‘‘a competitive knowledge economy,’’ for the UAE and ‘‘competitiveness in the case of Bahrain being key themes in their long term development agenda, one would no doubt imply a more than peripheral role of international commerce in these ambitious plans. The jury is still out on whether these countries will eventually accomplish their stated plans. It is, however, not disputed that the extent to which these countries will succeed in their plans and especially as those plans relate to attracting international business will significantly depend on the enforceability of foreign arbitral awards in their respective jurisdictions.  This is particularly the case given the centrality of arbitration is resolving international commercial disputes.

Perceptions, whether real or otherwise, that it is difficult to enforce foreign arbitral awards (FAA) would no doubt dent the image of a country as a place open for business. With particular reference to Saudi Arabia, previous studies have tended to cast doubts on the possibility of enforcing FAA in the country.[22] This research will, therefore, critically investigate process of enforcing foreign arbitral awards in Saudi Arabia. Focus will largely be on the practical issues.

1.2.1 Study questions

It is hoped that the paper will be able to answer the following questions:-

  1. How difficult is it to enforce foreign arbitral awards in Saudi Arabia?
  2. What are the laws governing the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in the UAE?
  3. How comes it is easy to enforce foreign arbitral awards in both the UAE and Bahrain but it is hardly easy to enforce them in Saudi Arabia?

1.2.2 Hypothesis

The paper will proceed on the assumption that it is more difficult to enforce foreign arbitral awards in Saudi Arabia in comparison to both the UAE and Bahrain.

  • Synopsis of the chapters

The rest of this chapter will introduce the topic of arbitration in the gulf generally and how arbitral awards are enforced. The paper will then move to an explanation of the laws that govern the enforcement of arbitral awards in the gulf with special attention on the similarities and differences between Saudi Arabia on the one side and Bahrain and UAE on the other.

Chapter 2 will review existing literature to further explain the arguments. It does by comparing and contrasting prior research on the topic as well as statistics showing the success rate of enforcing arbitral awards in the UAE and Bahrain on the one side and Saudi Arabia on the other.  Given that the legal systems in the three countries are comparable in terms of convention treaties, and jurisdiction it would be interesting to probe why the UAE and Bahrain is more flexible in arbitration than Saudi amongst other questions.

Chapter 3 will be the methodology and will discuss the different research methods used to gather information and data for the study. The paper will rely on secondary materials to save time and avoid costs of conducting primary research. In addition, it will be difficult to carry out research on the ground considering issues of proximity given that the focus of the research is on the gulf. Both quantitative and qualitative research methods will be utilised forming a mixed method approach. Such a approach maximises the potential due to the nature of this research requiring a large volume of data from different regions to test the hypothesis. Both the library and the university IT facilities -books and journals, internet to search electronic versions of relevant material, Google scholar, Google books and online Law journals and articles- will be the major tools.

On its part, chapter 4 will discuss the findings and results from the literature review. The paper will analyse the data gathered and give a detailed analysis with reference to the question and the aim to test the hypothesis.

Lastly, chapter 5 will be the concluding chapter. It will draw conclusions from the previous chapters and make the necessary recommendations. It will set off by providing a succinct summary of the research before proceeding to offer thoughts on that research while not forgetting to offer any recommendations if need be. For every recommendation provided, attempts would be made to offer explanations as to the possible benefits to be achieved from going through with such a recommendation. For instance, Saudi Arabia would have to have an explicit and transparent Arbitration Law in the event it is found that opaqueness and ambiguity are the issues. Such a recommendation would be consistent with the need to attract foreign investors as stated in the 2030 vision which focuses on a wider foreign investment in the KSA. Additionally, foreign investors are extremely prudent and need a clear legislative environment as well as the national business as it trades internationally with massive capitals. Therefore, to achieve that specific target, Saudi Arabia would have to have developed, explicit, transparent, documented and constant Arbitration Laws, which would not be on the discretion of the judges or other legislations or amended in a very frequent way. It has to draw a line between Sharia law and public policy.

  • Arbitration in the Gulf

Mention of the Gulf often refers to membership of a country to Gulf Cooperation Council for Arab States of the Gulf (GCC).[23] The present study is, however, only limited to the three countries of Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain. The populations in all the three countries are predominantly Muslim. Arbitration is not a new phenomenon in any of these countries as the Islamic religion has often supported arbitration. Arbitration is known in the Gulf as Thakim and it has a long history in this region.[24] Increased international business has shaped modern arbitration in the Gulf.[25] The increased use of international commercial arbitration has been necessary to support the increase in international commercial transactions.[26] That many states in the Gulf have acceded to the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards is evidence of the significant role of arbitration.[27]It is, therefore, worth knowing the advantages and disadvantages of arbitration.

1.4.1. Advantages of arbitration

Compared to the normal court litigation, arbitration is often seen as flexible, cost effective as well as economical with time.[28] Flexibility arises from the fact that parties to arbitration have the autonomy to choose many factors that affect the outcome of the process. For instance, parties can choose the applicable law. They can also choose the people who arbitrate their dispute. While it is quite possible for potential litigators to only make some choices such as the applicable law to their commercial disputes, those choices are much more circumscribed.

Furthermore, the use of subject matter experts in arbitration can greatly enhance the quality of the decisions.[29] This is not to say that experts are not used in normal litigation. It is only that arbitrators with subject matter expertise in the area of dispute are much more likely to make reasons decisions than judges who are most often not specialised in any given field. In addition, the finality of arbitral awards is a facilitative feature as it protects the award from being unnecessarily challenged.[30] Lastly, arbitration allows parties to avoid the risks involved in litigating before unfamiliar national courts. This is particularly important for those involved in international business. Depending on the court system in any given country, parties in normal litigation can often appeal to a higher court. Arbitral awards are often considered to be final with appeals only allowed in very exceptional cases.

1.4.2 Disadvantages of arbitration

Despite the many advantages, costs and time are some of the two disadvantages.[31] Unlike the court system, bringing multi-party disputes is not very easy in arbitration.[32] That each and every party to a given dispute must have their separate disputes can make arbitration both expensive and time consuming. These problems are further compounded in ad hoc arbitrations where parties have to spend considerable amounts of money in seminar rooms, hotels, lawyers and experts.[33]This can be contrasted with normal litigation where public facilities are available for the parties.

1.4.3 Enforcement of arbitral awards in the Gulf

It is not enough for someone to have an arbitral award in his or her favour. Besides having the award, it is equally very important to know that the award can easily be enforced. Knowing whether the conditions obtaining in a country will facilitate or avert enforcement makes it necessary to examine the conditions obtaining in the three countries under study. Given that they are the initial indicators to the ease of enforcement in a given country, this section briefly explain the laws governing enforcement in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the UAE.

1.4.3.1 Laws governing enforcement of foreign arbitral awards

At the international and regional levels, the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards is government by international and regional conventions respectively. The most important international treaty in this respect is the 1958 New York Convention. It only applies to the enforcement of arbitral awards made in a country other than the one where enforcement is sought. Bahrain was the first among the three countries to accede to the New York Convention on 6th April 1988.[34] On her part, Saudi Arabia acceded to the New York Convention in 1994.[35] The UAE was the last among the three to accede to the convention which it did on November 19, 2006.[36] It follows from this that all three countries are similar in their enforcement laws to the extent that they are members of the New York convention. The similarities in all three countries also extend to the fact that each is a member of other regional conventions having a bearing on enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. These regional conventions are the Riyadh Convention and the GCC Convention.[37]

A common feature of both the New York Convention and the regional instruments mentioned above is that they obligate member states to enforce foreign arbitral awards except in specifically indicated circumstances. One such circumstance relates to awards that are contrary to public policy.[38] The New York Convention does not define public policy such that what remains as public policy is left to be defined in the specific laws of a member state. This has meant that the ease of enforcement in any country will often depend on the scope of public policy in that country. A broad definition of public policy has allowed some countries to avoid enforcement.[39] Analyses of the ease of enforcement in the Gulf have often cited public policy as a major barrier to enforcement.

If all the three countries are under similar obligations under the conventions mentioned above, it follows that any differences in their laws must be domestic. The relevant legislation in Suadi Arabia the Saudi Arbitration Law (SAL) enacted under the Royal Decree No.M/34, 2012.[40] Since its accession to the New York Convention, judicial decisions in the UAE seems to suggest that the applicable laws for the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards are the principles contained in that convention.[41]Article 5 of the convention obligate member states to enforce foreign awards unless they are contrary to public policy or the subject matter is non-arbitral under the laws of the country. Like Saudi Arabia, Bahrain also has a separate arbitration law.[42]

  • Conclusion

This chapter has established the basis upon which the substantive research on the paper will have to proceed. For instance, it has come out from the chapter that the legal structure for the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in the three Gulf states of Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain are not very much different on paper. That the actual enforcement in Saudi Arabia may be more challenging than the other two states, therefore, calls for a deeper analysis of the issue. Chapter 2 picks from this by conducting a review of the existing literature so as to explain the issues further.

Chapter 2

Literature Review

2.1 Introduction

As already alluded to in the previous chapter, the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award is the most important stage in the entire arbitration process. Inability to enforce an arbitral award renders the whole process useless (ALEisa Phd thesis, p.72). In a survey where Dr. Almutawa participated as a researcher, both the UAE and Bahrain were ranked ahead of KSA in terms of friendliness to the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards.[43] In a scale of 1-10, Bahrain and the UAE respectively scored 7.44 and 7.43 while KSA on scored 3.44.[44] This confirms the hypothesis of this study that it is more difficult to enforce a foreign arbitral award in Saudi Arabia than it is in either the UAE or Bahrain. The review of the literature in this chapter will, therefore, aim to identify the possible reasons why this hypothesis holds. To that end, the scope of the review will be limited to the extent to which the existing literature offer answers to the research question.

2.2 The criteria for assessment

Like any comparative assessment, a conclusion that the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards is much easier in both the UAE and Bahrain than in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia must be based on some criteria. Available literature in international commercial arbitration offers numerous such criteria. A study by the World Bank Group singled out three key factors necessary for an effective arbitration regime.[45]The strength of arbitration laws in a country including adherence to international conventions, the ease of the process for the parties conducting arbitration in the given country, and the extent to which domestic courts assist the process even at the enforcement stage are the three factors identified in the study.[46] The present study will assess the likely reasons for the difficulty of enforcing foreign arbitral awards in the KSA on the basis of these factors.

2.3 Preliminary matters

It is, however, important to first clarify that recognition and enforcement are two separate concepts given that they are often commonly used as if they are the same.[47] When an award is recognised, it bars the person against whom it is sought to be enforced from bringing a court action on the same dispute.[48] The party seeking to enforce the award can plead in defence against a court action by the party against whom enforcement is sought that the matters are already fully dealt with in arbitration. On its part, enforcement is concerned with ensuring that the terms of the award are met.[49] One can, therefore, see recognition as serving as a form of defence while enforcement allows a party to request a court to take action against the loser in arbitration proceedings.

Another preliminary, but important, issue is the proper definition of what amounts to a foreign arbitral award. Its significance stems from the fact that the present analysis is concerned with the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. Moreover, the countries under analysis are predominantly Muslim which may have implications on how they view the concept of foreign. This issue has in fact been the subject of debate with some authors attributing the problem to the failure by lawyers and judges in the Gulf to correctly appreciate the concept of foreign arbitration.[50] This misunderstanding was partly based on the erroneous thinking that international arbitration was intended to oust the application of Shariah.To their credit, some courts in the Gulf have come out to clarify the position. In A.A Commercial Co. v. S. Motors Ltd Co. and D. Industrial Ltd Co[51].,the Abu-Dhabi Court of Appeal was clear that it is an error in the UAE to presume that the mere application of foreign law violates the Shariah.

The New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards suggest two criteria of determining whether an award is foreign.[52]On the one hand is the geographical criterion in which all awards made in the territory a country other than the country in which enforcement is sought is considered to be a foreign award. On the other hand is the functional criterion in which all awards not considered domestic in the country where enforcement is sought are foreign awards.

In addition to the definitional problems that Shariah may portend for the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, it may also implicate the extent to which the Gulf States comply with their treaty obligations.[53]While all three countries recognise Shariah as a source of law, they differ in the centrality accorded Shariah. For instance, Shariah is prescribed as a source of legislation in both Bahrain and the UAE.[54]On its part, Shariah and the Sunna (traditions) of Prophet Muhammad are the constitution.[55] It may appear that enforcement of a foreign arbitral award is less likely to happen in Saudi Arabia if it conflicts with the Shariah than would be the case in both Bahrain and the UAE.Almutawa has, however, convincingly argued that this should not necessarily be the case because even the Shariah require Muslims to honour their obligations. He, therefore, sees the obstacles to the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Suadi Arabia as emanating from something other than the fact that the country is Islamic.

2.4 Arbitration laws in the Gulf

            In a speech delivered on 24th November 2009 at  the London School of Economics (LSE), Professor Jan Paulson discussed arbitration in what he called ‘‘three dimensions.’’[56]By these three dimensions he meant national, pluralistic and autonomous.[57]  Each of the three dimensions refers to a legal order.[58] Proponents of arbitration as part of a national legal order contend that the laws governing arbitration are always the national laws of the various countries connected to each aspect of the arbitration process. It goes back to a paper written by Francis Mann in 1967 entitled ‘‘Lex Facit Arbitrum.’’[59]Commentators view this approach to arbitration as outdated.[60] On its part, the pluralistic view of arbitration posits that the effectiveness or otherwise of arbitration is determined by more than one legal order.[61]For instance, there is the legal order of the place of arbitration which may not have much practical effect as the legal order of the place where an award may be sought to be enforced.

The other dimension is to see arbitration as operating in its own autonomous legal system independent of national legal systems.[62] This thinking is currently seen to be the most dominant at the moment. It is confirmed by international instruments such as the New York Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1958(the New York Convention). Under Article V, competent authorities of contracting states are under an obligation to enforce foreign arbitral awards albeit subject to a few exceptions. The widespread adoption of the UNCITRAL model law on arbitration across the world has further added impetus to the autonomous view of arbitration.[63] If this view of arbitration is a true reflection of the facts on the ground, the parties to arbitration should never bother with any aspects of the various national laws. After all, there would be no value in bothering about these national laws when they have no relevance to the practical factors of arbitration. The reality, however, is that national laws do matter even in international arbitration.

Parties arbitrate with the expectation that they will be able to enforce any award arising from such processes. Should the losing party in arbitration refuse to comply with the terms of an award, the winning party has recourse in enforcing the award in the country where the losing party has assets. This should seem a fairly straight forward process as the New York Convention uniformly regulates the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. Article V of the Convention lists, amongst others, arbitrability and public policy as some of the grounds that a court may rely on to decline enforcing of an award for invalidity.[64]In other words, the fact that the subject matter of a dispute may not be the subject of arbitration according to the law of a country of enforcement is a reason for the courts of that country to refuse enforcement. The same can be said of situations where an arbitral award is contrary to the public policy of the enforcing court.[65]

It is instructive to note that out of all the invalidity grounds, only the one on arbitrability and that of public policy depend on the criteria set by the law of the competent authority dealing with the arbitration process at any given time.[66]This is particularly the reason why the rules on arbitrability and public policy may make it easy or difficult to enforce a foreign arbitral award. One, therefore, needs to analyse the arbitration laws of a country to have a picture of the ease or difficulty in enforcement. It is also for this reason that a study of the arbitration laws of the three subject countries is necessary.

2.4.1 Existence of special arbitration law

            Assessing whether a country has strong arbitration laws can also be seen from the perspective of the existence or otherwise specific arbitration laws. As a country, Saudi Arabia has its own arbitration law of 2012.[67] This is not the case with both the UAE and Bahrain where certain provisions of their respective civil procedure courts serve as the arbitration laws. What this reveals is that it is not all about having special arbitration laws that guarantees ease of enforcement of foreign arbitral awards.

2.4.2 Laws relating to the role of enforcing courts

            A party with a favourable arbitral award intending to enforce it in another country would rely to a great extent on the respective competent authorities in the enforcing country. The roles that these competent authorities play in the enforcement process can, therefore, determine the success or otherwise of the enforcement. Under the New York Convention, an enforcing court should limit its role to enforcing or declining to enforce an award.[68] The implication of the laws of c country that empower its courts to do more than what is permitted by the New York Convention would make enforcement more difficult. Writing in his PhD thesis, Abdulla looked at the national laws of several Gulf States and came to a number of conclusions.  One of these conclusions was that Saudi Arabia follows the same principle as evidenced by practice.[69]The thesis came to the same conclusion with respect to the national laws of the other two countries of UAE and Bahrain. While the findings by Abdulla are useful in assessing the state of knowledge on the issue, the fact that the PhD thesis was submitted in 2010 makes the information it provided not very up to date. A country like Saudi Arabia has since adopted a new arbitration law whose aspects may not have been captured in a 2010 study.

The role of the courts in the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards have also been looked at in terms of whether the courts are supportive or unsupportive of the initiative.

While all three countries under analysis are Islamic, the role that Islam plays in their legal systems is not exactly the same. For Saudi Arabia, the Basic Law stipulates the Holy Qur’an and the Sunaah as the constitution.[70]

Article 1 of the KSA Basic Law stipulates that the Holy Qur’an and Sunaah is the constitution of the country, which is governed on the basis of Islamic law (Shari’a).

 

In Saudi Arabia, the Board of Grievances (Diwan Al Mazalem) is the competent authority dealing with the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards.[71] The Board of Grievances Act 2007 clearly indicates that the Board has the jurisdiction to enforce foreign arbitral awards. Article 13 (J) of that Act provides that the administrative court has the authority to make decisions

In Bahrain, Article 253 of the Code of Commercial and Civil Procedure provides that foreign arbitral awards are enforceable under the same conditions which apply to the enforcement of foreign judgments under Article 252. According to Article 252, the Senior Civil Court has jurisdiction to enforce foreign arbitral awards, whereas the competent court as regards local arbitral awards is court which originally heard the dispute.[72] The Senior Civil Court also has jurisdiction over applications to enforce an arbitral award made under the International Arbitration Act.371 The headquarters of the Senior Civil Court are in Manama, the capital city,372 and the rulings are made by three judges.

In the UAE, Article 236 of Code of Civil Procedure declares that the provisions for the enforcement of foreign judgments under Article 235 are also applicable to foreign arbitral awards. Article 235 (1) lays down that a request for enforcement must be submitted to the Primary Court, whereas the competent court to enforce local arbitral awards is the court which originally heard the dispute.

[1] Jeswald W. Salacuse(2007). Is There a Better Way? Alternative Methods of Treaty-Based, Investor State Dispute Resolution. Fordham International Law Journal, 31(1), 138-185.(154)

[2] Jeswald w. Salacuse(2007)p154.

[3] Jeswald,p.154

[4] Jeswal,p.154

[5] Sir William Blair(2006).Contemporary Trends in the Resolution of International Commercial and Financial Disputes.

[6] Sir William Blair(2006).Contemporary Trends in the Resolution of International Commercial and Financial Disputes.,p.4

[7] Sir William Blair(2006).Contemporary Trends in the Resolution of International Commercial and Financial Disputes.,p.4

[8] International Bar Association(2015).The Current State and Future of International Arbitration

[9] International Bar Association(2015).The Current State and Future of International Arbitration

[10] Harisankar KS(2013). Contemporary International Arbitration in Asia:A Stock Take.p.1

[11] Harisanker KS(2013),p.1

[12] Harisanker KS(2013),p.1

[13] World Trade Organisation(2015). International Trade Statistics.p.44

[14] World Trade Organisation(2015). International Trade Statistics.p.44

[15] Luciani, G. Gulf Region: Economic Development and Diversification. Gerlach Press,

2012.

[16] Hvidt, M. Economic Diversification in GCC Countries: Past Record and Future

Trends. Kuwait Programme on Development, Governance and Globalization in the

Gulf States, London School of Economics, 2013.

[17] http://vision2030.gov.sa/en/node/161

[18] http://vision2030.gov.sa/en/node/7

[19] https://www.vision2021.ae/en/our-vision

[20] https://www.vision2021.ae/en/our-vision

[21]

[22] Abdulaziz Mohammed  A Bin Zaid,p.5

[23] The cooperation Council for Arab States of the Gulf, Member States, <http://www.gcc-sg.org/eng/index.php?action=GCC> at 10 of February 2012.

[24] Amer H. AlQahtani, ‘The Dubai Experience: Evaluating the Effectiveness and Efficiency of International Commercial Arbitration Laws in the Gulf Arab Region’ (DPhil thesis,  Macquarie University  2015)35

[25] Amer H. AlQahtani, ‘The Dubai Experience: Evaluating the Effectiveness and Efficiency of International Commercial Arbitration Laws in the Gulf Arab Region’ (DPhil thesis,  Macquarie University  2015)40

[26] Amer H. AlQahtani, ‘The Dubai Experience: Evaluating the Effectiveness and Efficiency of International Commercial Arbitration Laws in the Gulf Arab Region’ (DPhil thesis,  Macquarie University  2015)40

[27] Amer H. AlQahtani, ‘The Dubai Experience: Evaluating the Effectiveness and Efficiency of International Commercial Arbitration Laws in the Gulf Arab Region’ (DPhil thesis,  Macquarie University  2015)

[28] Babak Hendizadeh, ‘International Commercial Arbitration: The Effect of Culture and

Religion on Enforcement of Award’ (LLM thesis, Queen’s University 2012) 12

[29] Babak Hendizadeh, ‘International Commercial Arbitration: The Effect of Culture and

Religion on Enforcement of Award’ (LLM thesis, Queen’s University 2012) 12

[30] ibid

[31] ibid

[32] ibid

[33] ibid

[34] Abd al-ḤamidAḥdab and Jalal El-Ahdab, Arbitration with the Arab Countries (Kluwer Law International, 2011)102.

[35] Amer H. AlQahtani, ‘The Dubai Experience: Evaluating the Effectiveness and Efficiency of International Commercial Arbitration Laws in the Gulf Arab Region’ (DPhil thesis,  Macquarie University  2015)172

[36] Amer H. AlQahtani, ‘The Dubai Experience: Evaluating the Effectiveness and Efficiency of International Commercial Arbitration Laws in the Gulf Arab Region’ (DPhil thesis,  Macquarie University  2015)141

[37] Almutawa p.52

[38] Ahmed Mohd Khurshid Almutawa, ‘Challenges to the Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards in the States of the Gulf Cooperation Council’ (DPhil thesis, Macquarie University 2015)53

[39] Amer H. AlQahtani, ‘The Dubai Experience: Evaluating the Effectiveness and Efficiency of International Commercial Arbitration Laws in the Gulf Arab Region’ (DPhil thesis,  Macquarie University  2015)53

[40] Ahmed Mohd Khurshid Almutawa, ‘Challenges to the Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards in the States of the Gulf Cooperation Council’ (DPhil thesis, University of Portsmouth 2014)

[41] Amer H. AlQahtani, ‘The Dubai Experience: Evaluating the Effectiveness and Efficiency of International Commercial Arbitration Laws in the Gulf Arab Region’ (DPhil thesis,  Macquarie University  2015)60

[42] Amer H. AlQahtani, ‘The Dubai Experience: Evaluating the Effectiveness and Efficiency of International Commercial Arbitration Laws in the Gulf Arab Region’ (DPhil thesis,  Macquarie University  2015)60

[43] Appendix to Almutawa

[44] Appendix to Amutawa

[45] The World Bank Group, Arbitrating Commercial Disputes Methodology, (2012) <http://iab.worldbank.org/Methodology/Arbitrating-disputes>.at 10 of September 2014.

[46] World Bank Group(at 10 of September 2014

[47] Lew,Mistelis and Kroll(2003),pp.26-29;Refern and Hunter(2004),p.10;Tweeddale A(2005),p.408

[48] Redfern and Hunter(2004),para10-11

[49] Lew J.,Mistelis,L., and Kroll,S.(2003),para 26-12

[50] Almutalawa9thesis,p.44

[51] A.A Commercial Co. v. S. Motors Ltd Co. and D. Industrial Ltd Co,Abu-Dhabi Court of Appeal, Case No.10007/1981 Unpublished

[52] New York Convention 1958 Article 1(1)

[53] Almutawa,p.60

[54] Almutawa,p.61

[55] Basic Law of Governance issued by the Royal Order No (A/90) 27/08/1412 H corresponding to

01/03/1992, and published in Umm Al-Qura Gazette No 3397 on 02/09/1412 H corresponding to

05/03/1992.

[56] Jan Paulsson, ‘’Arbitration in three dimensions,’’ LSE Law, Society and Economy Working Papers 2/2010.

[57] Jan Paulson above p.3

[58] Jan Paulson

[59] In P. Sanders (ed), International Arbitration: Liber Amicorum for Martin Domke (Hague: Nijhoff, 1967), 159.

[60] Jan Paulson above p.7

[61] Jan Paulson above p.10

[62] Jan Paulson above p.11

[63] United Nations Commission on International Trade Laws (UNCITRAL)

[64] the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958art.V(2).

[65] Giuditta Moss,p27

[66] Giuditta Moss,p27

[67] Saudi Arbitration Law 2012

[68] Article V New York Convention lists limited grounds for refusal of enforcment

[69] Abdulla p.85.

[70] Article 1 Basic Law

[71] The law of the Board of Grievances, Royal Decree No. (M/78), Article 13 (J).

[72] The Code of Civil and Commercial Procedure, Articles 240 and 241.

Do you need an Original High Quality Academic Custom Essay?