We use cookies to improve your website experience. To learn about our use of cookies and how you can manage your cookie settings, please see our Cookie Policy. By continuing to use the website, you consent to our use of cookies. Close

THE SUSPENSION OF ARBITRAL AWARDS ON ENFORCEMENT AND THE CONTINUING INFLUENCE OF THE TERRITORIALITY THEORY

Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly

THE SUSPENSION OF ARBITRAL AWARDS ON ENFORCEMENT AND THE CONTINUING INFLUENCE OF THE TERRITORIALITY THEORY

Masood Ahmed*

Leidos v Hellenic
This note considers the recent English High Court decision in Leidos Inc v The Hellenic Republic.1 Although the principal issue in the case concerned the allocation of the costs of the proceedings relating to the enforcement of an arbitral award, the arguments of the parties encompassed the novel issue as to the interpretation under s.103(2)(f) of the Arbitration Act 1996 (“the 1996 Act”)2 of the word “suspended” or “suspension” of an arbitral award by the court at the seat of arbitration. Section 103(2) sets out the grounds upon which recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award may be refused. One of those grounds, under s.103(2)(f), is where the award has been “suspended by a competent authority of the country in which … it was made”.3 That provision incorporates and reflects the wording of Art.V(1)(e) of the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement
Case and comment

373

The rest of this document is only available to i-law.com online subscribers.

If you are already a subscriber, please enter your details below to log in.

Enter your email address to log in as a user on your corporate account.
Remember me on this computer

Not yet an i-law subscriber?

Devices

Request a trial Find out more