Lisbon Court of Appeal | Application of the new Arbitration Act ratione temporis | 14-04-2016 | Case #050

Lisbon Court of Appeal
Date: 14-04-2016
Case Nr. 2455/13.4YYLSB-A.L1-2
LINK DGSI

 

Headline:

If the LAV of 1986 is in force at the time that the parties submitted the request for arbitration, this will be the law applicable to arbitration proceedings, even if the LAV of 2011 is in force at the time that the award is rendered.

An alleged misapplication of the rules of limitation does not violate the “international public order” of the Portuguese State, and is therefore not grounds for setting aside an arbitration award.

 

Summary:

1. If the LAV of 1986 is in force at the time that the parties submitted the request for arbitration, this will be the law applicable to arbitration proceedings, regardless of whether the LAV of 2011 is in force at the time that the award is rendered.

2. The three methods of contesting an arbitration award are:
(i) setting aside the award (within one month of the notification of the award) pursuant to Article 27 of the LAV of 1986,
(ii) appeal of the award to the Court of Appeal (unless the parties have waived the right to appeal) pursuant to Article 29 of the LAV of 1986,
(iii) refusing enforcement of the award based on the grounds for setting aside the award (even if the time limit for setting aside has lapsed) pursuant to Article 31 of the LAV of 1986.

3. In addition to the grounds indicated in Article 27 of the LAV of 1986, the award can also be set aside on the ground that the content of the award offends the principles of the “international public order” of the Portuguese State.

4. The rules that constitute the internal public order and the principles that are part of the “international public order” are different. While the former refers to the set of imperative norms of our legal system that constitute a limit to private autonomy and freedom of contract, “international public order” is restricted to the essential values ​​of the Portuguese State. Thus, the principles that constitute the “international public order” are a more restricted nucleus than those that underlie the internal public order referred to in Articles 271 (1), 280 (2) and 281 of the Portuguese Civil Code.

5.  A tribunal’s alleged misapplication of the rules of limitation does not conflict with the “international public order” of the Portuguese State, and therefore does not constitute grounds for setting aside the award.

This case summary was kindly prepared by Sameer Thakur (sameerthakur@live.in, NALSAR University of Law), Rishabh Raheja, (rishabharaheja@gmail.com, NALSAR University of Law), and Abhishek Babbar (abhishekbabbar1996@gmail.com).

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.