King's College London

Research portal

Enforcement of Arbitration Agreements by National Courts: What Level of Review?

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Standard

Enforcement of Arbitration Agreements by National Courts: What Level of Review? / Penades Fons, Manuel; Tent, Pedro.

Fach Gómez K, López Rodríguez AM (eds) 60 Years of the New York Convention: Key Issues and Future Challenges. ed. / Katya Fach Gómez. Wolters Kluwer, 2019. p. 3-17.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Harvard

Penades Fons, M & Tent, P 2019, Enforcement of Arbitration Agreements by National Courts: What Level of Review? in K Fach Gómez (ed.), Fach Gómez K, López Rodríguez AM (eds) 60 Years of the New York Convention: Key Issues and Future Challenges. Wolters Kluwer, pp. 3-17.

APA

Penades Fons, M., & Tent, P. (2019). Enforcement of Arbitration Agreements by National Courts: What Level of Review? In K. Fach Gómez (Ed.), Fach Gómez K, López Rodríguez AM (eds) 60 Years of the New York Convention: Key Issues and Future Challenges (pp. 3-17). Wolters Kluwer.

Vancouver

Penades Fons M, Tent P. Enforcement of Arbitration Agreements by National Courts: What Level of Review? In Fach Gómez K, editor, Fach Gómez K, López Rodríguez AM (eds) 60 Years of the New York Convention: Key Issues and Future Challenges. Wolters Kluwer. 2019. p. 3-17

Author

Penades Fons, Manuel ; Tent, Pedro. / Enforcement of Arbitration Agreements by National Courts: What Level of Review?. Fach Gómez K, López Rodríguez AM (eds) 60 Years of the New York Convention: Key Issues and Future Challenges. editor / Katya Fach Gómez. Wolters Kluwer, 2019. pp. 3-17

Bibtex Download

@inbook{88d5ffc396d84f068ee779dd61c32396,
title = "Enforcement of Arbitration Agreements by National Courts: What Level of Review?",
abstract = "Despite being a classic topic in arbitration, the doctrine of kompetenz-kompetenz continues to generate controversy in practice. This paper examines a 2017 decision of the Spanish Supreme Court concerning the enforcement of arbitration agreements by national courts at the pre-award stage and compares it with the English and French solutions. The divergence evidenced by these jurisdictions is motivated by the silence of article II(3) NYC on the meaning of {\textquoteleft}null and void, inoperative and incapable of being performed{\textquoteright}. The authors explore the issues of burden and standard of proof that derive from this provision and from national practices, and argue that the gap left by the NYC cannot be filled up with a “one-size-fits-all” rule. Rather, the better solution requires distinguishing between the different scenarios in which national courts might be asked to examine the validity, effectiveness and scope of arbitration agreements.",
keywords = "Arbitration, Spain, Arbitration agreements, kompetenz kompetenz",
author = "{Penades Fons}, Manuel and Pedro Tent",
year = "2019",
language = "English",
isbn = "9789403501550",
pages = "3--17",
editor = "{Fach G{\'o}mez}, Katya",
booktitle = "Fach G{\'o}mez K, L{\'o}pez Rodr{\'i}guez AM (eds) 60 Years of the New York Convention: Key Issues and Future Challenges",
publisher = "Wolters Kluwer",

}

RIS (suitable for import to EndNote) Download

TY - CHAP

T1 - Enforcement of Arbitration Agreements by National Courts: What Level of Review?

AU - Penades Fons, Manuel

AU - Tent, Pedro

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - Despite being a classic topic in arbitration, the doctrine of kompetenz-kompetenz continues to generate controversy in practice. This paper examines a 2017 decision of the Spanish Supreme Court concerning the enforcement of arbitration agreements by national courts at the pre-award stage and compares it with the English and French solutions. The divergence evidenced by these jurisdictions is motivated by the silence of article II(3) NYC on the meaning of ‘null and void, inoperative and incapable of being performed’. The authors explore the issues of burden and standard of proof that derive from this provision and from national practices, and argue that the gap left by the NYC cannot be filled up with a “one-size-fits-all” rule. Rather, the better solution requires distinguishing between the different scenarios in which national courts might be asked to examine the validity, effectiveness and scope of arbitration agreements.

AB - Despite being a classic topic in arbitration, the doctrine of kompetenz-kompetenz continues to generate controversy in practice. This paper examines a 2017 decision of the Spanish Supreme Court concerning the enforcement of arbitration agreements by national courts at the pre-award stage and compares it with the English and French solutions. The divergence evidenced by these jurisdictions is motivated by the silence of article II(3) NYC on the meaning of ‘null and void, inoperative and incapable of being performed’. The authors explore the issues of burden and standard of proof that derive from this provision and from national practices, and argue that the gap left by the NYC cannot be filled up with a “one-size-fits-all” rule. Rather, the better solution requires distinguishing between the different scenarios in which national courts might be asked to examine the validity, effectiveness and scope of arbitration agreements.

KW - Arbitration

KW - Spain

KW - Arbitration agreements

KW - kompetenz kompetenz

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9789403501550

SP - 3

EP - 17

BT - Fach Gómez K, López Rodríguez AM (eds) 60 Years of the New York Convention: Key Issues and Future Challenges

A2 - Fach Gómez, Katya

PB - Wolters Kluwer

ER -

View graph of relations

© 2018 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454