Public Policy and the New York Convention in Practice: Substantial Convergence or Resisting Fragmentation?

This paper draws on the theoretical foundations of public policy to examine how courts have interpreted the safeguard mechanism set out in Art. V(2)(b) of the New York Convention. It explores the enduring tension between the Convention’s pro-enforcement bias and the need to safeguard the integrity of the legal order of the recognition and enforcement forum, with particular attention to the scope and intensity of the scrutiny conducted at the post-award stage. While the analysis reveals a growing convergence around a narrowly defined concept of public policy—one that increasingly reflects an emerging international standard—it also highlights the persistent challenges courts encounter in balancing arbitration’s efficiency with its legitimacy. This contribution underscores the importance of calibrated judicial oversight, advocating for a methodology grounded in a coherent and sound conceptualization of the public policy exception.

Publication Details

Journal
Archivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna)
Published
2025-01-01
Primary Topic
International Arbitration and Investment Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Public Policy and the New York Convention in Practice: Substantial Convergence or Resisting Fragmentation?

Archivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna)
International Arbitration and Investment Law
article

Public Policy and the New York Convention in Practice: Substantial Convergence or Resisting Fragmentation?

article en

Abstract

This paper draws on the theoretical foundations of public policy to examine how courts have interpreted the safeguard mechanism set out in Art. V(2)(b) of the New York Convention. It explores the enduring tension between the Convention’s pro-enforcement bias and the need to safeguard the integrity of the legal order of the recognition and enforcement forum, with particular attention to the scope and intensity of the scrutiny conducted at the post-award stage. While the analysis reveals a growing convergence around a narrowly defined concept of public policy—one that increasingly reflects an emerging international standard—it also highlights the persistent challenges courts encounter in balancing arbitration’s efficiency with its legitimacy. This contribution underscores the importance of calibrated judicial oversight, advocating for a methodology grounded in a coherent and sound conceptualization of the public policy exception.

Archivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 36%
International Arbitration and Investment Law
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.