Abstract
The AA Bill proposed to consolidate the provisions of all Pakistani laws dealing with domestic and foreign arbitrations, including commercial and investment arbitration. The proposal was withdrawn presumably because the subject matter of foreign commercial and investment arbitration did not fit together in one consolidated statue. It was also problematic to provide rules for domestic arbitration which would include all subtypes of arbitration, such as various kinds of voluntary and compulsory arbitration provided by a number of statues dealing with various subject matters.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
REFA Section 10.
- 2.
However, courts will not be required to determine the foreign character of an award under REFA in respect of awards rendered before 14 July, 2005 because REFA does not apply to such awards by virtue of its Section 4(4).
- 3.
Section 2(d).
- 4.
The status of the NY Convention is available online at: http://www.uncitral.org/uncitral/en/uncitral_texts/arbitration/NYConvention_status.html
- 5.
Status of the Protocol is available online at: http://treaties.un.org/pages/LONViewDetails.aspx?src=LON&id=543&lang=en, and the status of the Convention is available online at: http://treaties.un.org/pages/LONViewDetails.aspx?src=LON&id=544&lang=en
- 6.
Sections 3(2) and 3(3).
- 7.
Section 8. “8. Inconsistency—In the event of any inconsistency between this Act, any other law, or any judgment of any Court and the Convention, the Convention shall prevail to the extent of the inconsistency.”
- 8.
Metropolitan Steel Corporation Ltd. v. Macsteel International U.K. Ltd. (2006 PLD Karachi 664).
- 9.
Messrs Hasan Ali Rice Export Co. v. Flame Maritime Ltd. and another (2004 CLD Karachi 334), para.(c); Lithuanian Airlines v. Bhoja Airlines (2004 CLC Karachi 544).
- 10.
Travel Automation (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Abacus International (Pvt.) Ltd. (2006 CLD Karachi 497).
- 11.
Far Eastern Impex (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Quest International Nederland BV and Others (2009 CLD Karachi 153).
- 12.
Paras.(a) and (d).
- 13.
Para.(b) of the judgement.
- 14.
Para.(c) of the judgement.
- 15.
Shahid Jamil, Pakistan’s Implementation of the New York Convention, International Journal of Arbitration, Mediation and Dispute Management, Vol. 74, No. 2 (May 2008), p. 173.
- 16.
See China National Machinery Import and Export Corporation v. Tufail Chemical Industries Ltd. (2005 CLD Karachi 1577).
- 17.
Ralli Brothers & Coney Ltd. v. Muhammad Amin Muhammad Bashir Ltd. (1987 CLC Karachi 83), para. (h).
- 18.
Messrs Jugotekstil Impex v. Messrs Shams Textile Mills Ltd. (1990 MLD Karachi 857).
- 19.
Messrs Yangtze (London) Ltd. v. Messrs Barlas Bros. (Karachi) (1961 PLD Supreme Court 573).
- 20.
See Hitachi v. Rupali Polyester (1998 SCMR 1618).
- 21.
See Dr. Shahid Jamil, Pakistani Arbitration: Towards the Model Law, The Counsel, Vol. 1 (Summer 2010), available online at http://www.counselpakistan.com/vol-1/dispute-resolution/pakistani-arbitration.php.
- 22.
REFA Section 6 (2).
- 23.
AIDA first and second recitals and Section 8.
- 24.
AIDA Section 7.
- 25.
AIDA Section 3 (1).
- 26.
Section 4 (b).
- 27.
Section 4, first paragraph.
- 28.
Section 4 (c).
- 29.
Section 5.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ghouri, A.A. (2013). The Position of New REFA and AIDA Regimes. In: Law and Practice of Foreign Arbitration and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards in Pakistan. SpringerBriefs in Law. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32744-5_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32744-5_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-32743-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-32744-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)