Is "public policy" an authorisation to take a second look at an arbitration award? Not in Japan | Practical Law

Is "public policy" an authorisation to take a second look at an arbitration award? Not in Japan | Practical Law

This article examines the Tokyo District Court decision of 13 June 2011 (Tokyo District Court Heisei 21 (chu) No. 6) and the Tokyo High Court decision of 13 March 2012 (Tokyo High Court Heisei 23 (ra) No. 1334), which upheld the decision of the District Court. These are the only cases to date which have involved the Japanese courts setting aside an arbitral award. The article discusses the history of the case and examines its implications for future arbitrations in Japan.

Is "public policy" an authorisation to take a second look at an arbitration award? Not in Japan

by Junichi Tobimatsu, Mori Hamada & Matsumoto
Law stated as at 01 Sep 2013 • Japan
This article examines the Tokyo District Court decision of 13 June 2011 (Tokyo District Court Heisei 21 (chu) No. 6) and the Tokyo High Court decision of 13 March 2012 (Tokyo High Court Heisei 23 (ra) No. 1334), which upheld the decision of the District Court. These are the only cases to date which have involved the Japanese courts setting aside an arbitral award. The article discusses the history of the case and examines its implications for future arbitrations in Japan.
This article is part of the multi-jurisdictional guide to arbitration procedures and practice. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/arbitration-guide.