File(s) under permanent embargo
Enforcement of arbitral awards where the seat of the arbitration is Australia, how the Eisenwerk decision might still be a sleeping assassin
journal contributionposted on 2007-01-01, 00:00 authored by S Barrett-White, Christopher Duncan Kee
This article examines the enforcement of foreign awards in Australia. It identifies and explains the difference between a “foreign award” and “international arbitration award,” observing it is a somewhat surprising but potentially significant distinction. The article then moves to consider the consequences of the distinction with particular reference to the Australian arbitral landscape. Australia has dual arbitration regimes operating at the state and federal level. Particular attention is given to the still controversial Queensland Supreme Court of Appeal decision in Australian Granites Ltd. v. Eisenwerk Hensel Bayreyth Dipl-Ing Burkhardt GmbH. The article concludes by promoting a line of interpretation that will effectively allow subsequent courts to avoid the potentially disastrous effects the Eisenwerk decision may yet still wreak.