CLAUSE 4:
REGISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF ARBITRATION AWARDS:
SUPPLEMENTARIES
1.
Can you give a hypothetical example of an international
arbitral case which might involve the United Kingdom?
International arbitration as a method of settlement of MIGA's
dispute with host countries is provided for as the ultimate route,
to be followed only in the unlikely event that a dispute cannot be resolved through negotiation. In the experience of other
international financial institutions, the latter mechanism
(negotiation) has proved so far to be adequate for the settlement
of all disputes, and no resort to arbitration has taken place in
spite of its availability. It is thus unlikely that MIGA will ever
have recourse to international arbitration to settle a dispute; but
we cannot wholly exclude the possibility.
If a dispute between the host country and MIGA were settled by
arbitration in MIGA's favour it could be that the terms of such a
settlement would include the award of damages to MIGA. If the host country possessed assets in the United Kingdom, enforcement of the award might be sought by MIGA against those assets; and we would be obliged under the Convention to ensure the enforcement of the award
as if it were a final judgement of a court in the United Kingdom.
2.
Do not the sections of the Bill relating to arbitration
amount to an infringement of the sovereignty of British courts?
It is not an infringement of the sovereignty of British courts for
them to register and enforce an arbitral award, any more than it is
to register and enforce a judgement of a foreign court. The courts
of the United Kingdom already register and enforce foreign arbitral
awards under the 1958 New York Convention, to which most trading
nations of the world are party. Under the MIGA Bill, the UK courts are merely lending their assistance in the enforcement of an award
which the parties have agreed would be settled by arbitration.