Australia as an arbitration-friendly country: The tension between party autonomy and finality

Louise Parsons, Jack Leonard

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

5 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The landmark decision of the High Court of Australia in the recent case of TCL Air Conditioner (Zhongshan) Co Ltd v The Judges of the Federal Court of Australia [2013] HCA 5 reinforced the importance of the principle of party autonomy in international commercial arbitration in Australia. The case was highly acclaimed as a case that confirmed Australia as an “arbitration-friendly” country. This article examines the tension between the interest in finality and enforcement of arbitral awards, and the interest in a quality award. The first interest would generally argue against contractual expansion of judicial review clauses in the arbitration agreement; by contrast the second interest would support a contractual mechanism for the review of arbitral awards and contractually expanded judicial review clauses. By enforcing contractually expanded judicial review clauses, the interests of the “winner” (with an interest in finality and enforcement) and the shared interests of both parties in a quality award (irrespective of them being winner or loser) will be protected.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)357-387
Number of pages31
JournalContemporary Asia Arbitration Journal
Volume7
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Fingerprint

finality
arbitration
autonomy
air

Cite this

@article{688366449a9a416dadb6fe70182e9c5d,
title = "Australia as an arbitration-friendly country: The tension between party autonomy and finality",
abstract = "The landmark decision of the High Court of Australia in the recent case of TCL Air Conditioner (Zhongshan) Co Ltd v The Judges of the Federal Court of Australia [2013] HCA 5 reinforced the importance of the principle of party autonomy in international commercial arbitration in Australia. The case was highly acclaimed as a case that confirmed Australia as an “arbitration-friendly” country. This article examines the tension between the interest in finality and enforcement of arbitral awards, and the interest in a quality award. The first interest would generally argue against contractual expansion of judicial review clauses in the arbitration agreement; by contrast the second interest would support a contractual mechanism for the review of arbitral awards and contractually expanded judicial review clauses. By enforcing contractually expanded judicial review clauses, the interests of the “winner” (with an interest in finality and enforcement) and the shared interests of both parties in a quality award (irrespective of them being winner or loser) will be protected.",
author = "Louise Parsons and Jack Leonard",
year = "2014",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
pages = "357--387",
journal = "Contemporary Asia Arbitration Journal",
issn = "1999-9747",
publisher = "National Taiwan University (IEEB)",
number = "2",

}

Australia as an arbitration-friendly country : The tension between party autonomy and finality. / Parsons, Louise; Leonard, Jack.

In: Contemporary Asia Arbitration Journal, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2014, p. 357-387.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Australia as an arbitration-friendly country

T2 - The tension between party autonomy and finality

AU - Parsons, Louise

AU - Leonard, Jack

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - The landmark decision of the High Court of Australia in the recent case of TCL Air Conditioner (Zhongshan) Co Ltd v The Judges of the Federal Court of Australia [2013] HCA 5 reinforced the importance of the principle of party autonomy in international commercial arbitration in Australia. The case was highly acclaimed as a case that confirmed Australia as an “arbitration-friendly” country. This article examines the tension between the interest in finality and enforcement of arbitral awards, and the interest in a quality award. The first interest would generally argue against contractual expansion of judicial review clauses in the arbitration agreement; by contrast the second interest would support a contractual mechanism for the review of arbitral awards and contractually expanded judicial review clauses. By enforcing contractually expanded judicial review clauses, the interests of the “winner” (with an interest in finality and enforcement) and the shared interests of both parties in a quality award (irrespective of them being winner or loser) will be protected.

AB - The landmark decision of the High Court of Australia in the recent case of TCL Air Conditioner (Zhongshan) Co Ltd v The Judges of the Federal Court of Australia [2013] HCA 5 reinforced the importance of the principle of party autonomy in international commercial arbitration in Australia. The case was highly acclaimed as a case that confirmed Australia as an “arbitration-friendly” country. This article examines the tension between the interest in finality and enforcement of arbitral awards, and the interest in a quality award. The first interest would generally argue against contractual expansion of judicial review clauses in the arbitration agreement; by contrast the second interest would support a contractual mechanism for the review of arbitral awards and contractually expanded judicial review clauses. By enforcing contractually expanded judicial review clauses, the interests of the “winner” (with an interest in finality and enforcement) and the shared interests of both parties in a quality award (irrespective of them being winner or loser) will be protected.

M3 - Article

VL - 7

SP - 357

EP - 387

JO - Contemporary Asia Arbitration Journal

JF - Contemporary Asia Arbitration Journal

SN - 1999-9747

IS - 2

ER -