Transnational public policy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu25.2022.105Abstract
The article explores the legal institution of transnational public policy, which is unfamiliar in Russian judicial practice. This type of public policy is usually only mentioned in passing in studies dealing with the application of the public policy clause. Meanwhile, the transnational public policy is a quite complex legal phenomenon, on the legal nature and even application expediency of which, there are diametrically opposed opinions. The disputes concerning transnational public policy largely stem from the more global contradictions caused by the existence of various theories about the legal nature of international arbitration. At the same time, the transnational public policy is no longer exclusively a theoretical construction and is used by international commercial and investment arbitrations, although infrequently. The arbitrators’ concerns when using this legal institution are due to the uncertainty of its content, the lack of a stable practice of use, as well as an understandable reluctance to justify their own conclusions in their award by referring to a dubious (from the position of the national court, which will subsequently enforce such an award) legal concept. Meanwhile, rare cases when arbitrators nevertheless decided to resort to a reference to a transnational public policy become the object of close attention of foreign researchers as examples of a very progressive approach to dispute resolution and argumentation of decisions made. The article defines and compares the main theoretical views on the essence and content of the transnational public policy, examines the practice of its application by international commercial and investment arbitrations, and also examines the possible prospects for its application by national judicial authorities. The opinions of researchers, including negative ones, regarding the viability of the concept of transnational public policy itself are also presented. The major material for the study were foreign scientific articles, which set out various views on the legal nature of the transnational public policy, as well as a few examples from international arbitral practice. Based on the results of the study, conclusions are drawn about the prospects of transnational public policy application by state courts, as well as about the feasibility of its use by international commercial and investment arbitrations.
Keywords:
transnational public policy, public policy clause, international commercial arbitration, international investment arbitration, seat of arbitration, applicable law
Downloads
References
Amianto, Lodovico. 2019. The role of “unclean hands” defences in international investment law. McGill Journal of Dispute Resolution 6: 1–37.
Asoskov, Anton V. 2012. Conflict of laws regulation of contractual obligations. Moscow, Infotropic Media Publ. (In Russian)
Baniassadi, Mohammad R. 1992. Do mandatory rules of public law limit choice of law in international commercial arbitration. International Tax & Business Lawyer 10 (1): 59–84.
Bogatina, Julia G. 2010. Public policy clause in private international law: Theoretical problems and modern practice. Moscow, Statut Publ. (In Russian)
Calliess, Gralf-Peter, Renner, Moritz. 2009. Transnationalizing private law — the public and the private dimensions of transnational commercial law. German Law Journal 10 (10): 1341–1356.
Chukwumerije, Okezie. 1993. Mandatory rules of Law of International Commercial Arbitration. African Journal of International and Comparative Law 5 (3): 561–580.
Chuprunov, Ivan S. 2013. Arbitrability: applicable law and influence of mandatory norms. Novye gorizonty mezhdunarodnogo arbitrazha: collection of articles. Iss. 1, eds by Asoskov, Anton V., Vilkova, Nina G., Khodykin, Roman M. Moscow, Infotropic Media Publ.: 297–361. (In Russian).
Davidenko, Dmitriy L., Hizunova, Aleksandra N. 2013. The meaning and functions of the public policy clause in foreign and Russian law. Zakon 2: 31–38. (In Russian)
Fazilatfar, Hossein. 2012. Transnational public policy: Does it function from arbitrability to enforcement? City University of Hong Kong Law Review 3 (2): 289–313.
Fry, James D. 2009. Désordre Public International under the New York Convention: Wither truly international public policy. Chinese Journal of International Law 8 (1): 81–134.
Gaillard, Emmanuel, Savage, John, eds. 1999. Fouchard Gaillard Goldman on International Commercial Arbitration. The Hague, London, Boston, Kluwer Law International.
Kanashevsky, Vladimir A. 2008. Foreign economic transactions: substantive and conflict of laws regulation. Moscow, Wolters Kluwer. (In Russian)
Kessedjian, Catherine. 2007. Transnational public policy. International Arbitration 2006: Back to Basics? Ed. by Albert Jan Van den Berg, ICCA Congress Series 13: 857–870. Available at: https://www.kluwerarbitration.com/document/ipn31653?q=Transnational%20Public%20Policy (accessed: 18.10.2020).
Kreindler, Richard. 2003. Approaches to the application of transnational public policy by arbitrators. Journal of World Investment 4 (2): 239–250.
Krokhalev, Sergei V. 2006. The category of public policy in international civil procedure. St Petersburg, St Petersburg University Press. (In Russian)
Lalive, Pierre. 1987. Transnational (or truly international) public policy and international arbitration. Comparative arbitration practice and public policy in arbitration, ed. by Pieter Sanders, ICCA Congress Series 3: 258–318. Available at: https://www.kluwerarbitration.com/document/ipn14788?q=Transnational%20(or%20Truly%20International)%20Public%20Policy%20and%20International%20Arbitration (accessed: 18.07.2021).
Lebedev, Sergey N., Kabatova, Elena V., eds. 2011. International private law. In 2 vols. Moscow, Statut Publ. (In Russian)
Litvinsky, Dmitriy V. 2005. Recognition of foreign judgments in civil cases (comparative legal analysis of French legislation, judicial practice and legal doctrine). St Petersburg, St. Petersburg University Press. (In Russian)
Lo, Chang-fa. 2008. Principles and criteria for international and transnational public policies in commercial arbitration. Contemporary Asia Arbitration Journal 1 (1): 67–90.
Moses, Margaret L. 2019. Chapter 11: Public policy under the New York Convention: National, international, and transnational. 60 Years of the New York Convention: Key issues and future challenges, eds Katia F. Gomez, Ana M. Lopez-Rodriguez, 184–196. The Hague, London, Boston, Kluwer Law International.
Reisman, Michael. 2007. Law, international public policy (so-called) and arbitral choice in international commercial arbitration. International Arbitration 2006: Back to Basics? Ed. Albert Jan Van den Berg, ICCA Congress Series 13: 855–856. Available at: https://www.kluwerarbitration.com/document/ipn31652?q=Law%2C%20International%20Public%20Policy%20(Socalled)%20and%20Arbitral%20Choice%20in%20International%20Commercial%20Arbitration (accessed: 26.12.2020).
Seelig, Marie L. 2009. The notion of transnational public policy and its impact on jurisdiction arbitrability and admissibility. Annals of the Faculty of Law in Belgrade, International Edition 57 (3): 116–134.
Sneij, Florentine S. 2016. Are IIAs old-fashioned: How consistency in the use of public policy fosters the object and purpose of investment agreements. Uniform Law Review 21 (2–3): 197–215.
Trakman, Leon E. 2018. Aligning state sovereignty with transnational public policy. Tulane Law Review 93 (2): 207–268.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Articles of "Pravovedenie" are open access distributed under the terms of the License Agreement with Saint Petersburg State University, which permits to the authors unrestricted distribution and self-archiving free of charge.
