Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Challenging Arbitral Awards: A Comparative Study of Chinese Law, British Law and UNCITRAL Model Law

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Frontiers of Law in China

Support and supervision of a court ensure the integrity of the arbitral process and protect the public interest. However, to prevent the confidence of the arbitral system from being damaged, the judicial control should not be too strict. The support and supervision of a court can be seen in many aspects, among which is to challenge an award. Under the Chinese arbitration law, an award made by a foreign arbitration agency is regarded as a foreign award, challenge of which involves resisting recognition and enforcement in accordance with the relevant provisions of the international treaties concluded or acceded to by the People’s Republic of China or on the principle of reciprocity.1 Accordingly, an award made by a Chinese arbitration agency is regarded as a domestic award, challenge of which includes setting aside and resisting enforcement. As to the grounds and procedures for challenging a domestic award, including foreign-related awards and non-foreign-related awards, some Chinese provisions are either obscure or contradictory. There may be room for the Chinese system to be modernized. The Model Law and the English Arbitration Act of 1996 may be used for its reference.

10.1007/s11463-011-0137-1
/content/journals/10.1007/s11463-011-0137-1
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
10
5
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1007/s11463-011-0137-1
Loading

Data & Media loading...

http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1007/s11463-011-0137-1
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1007/s11463-011-0137-1
2011-10-22
2017-11-21

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    Frontiers of Law in China — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation