Losing the Right to Challenge Arbitral Awards

This dissertation addresses the loss of the right to challenge arbitral awards, particularly on Article 4 of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, which embodies the principal of waiver to object, stating that a party that proceeds with arbitration without timely objecting...

وصف كامل

محفوظ في:
التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
المؤلف الرئيسي: GERGEOS, RANA GHASSAN (author)
منشور في: 2025
الموضوعات:
الوصول للمادة أونلاين:https://bspace.buid.ac.ae/handle/1234/3763
الوسوم: إضافة وسم
لا توجد وسوم, كن أول من يضع وسما على هذه التسجيلة!
_version_ 1862980614673661952
author GERGEOS, RANA GHASSAN
author_facet GERGEOS, RANA GHASSAN
author_role author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Dr Alhyari, Omar
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv GERGEOS, RANA GHASSAN
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2025-06
2026-01-26T09:07:37Z
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv 23000977
https://bspace.buid.ac.ae/handle/1234/3763
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv en
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv British University In Dubai
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv UNCITRAL Model Law
arbitral awards
challenging awards
waiver of right to object
party autonomy
Mandatory and non-mandatory provisions.
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Losing the Right to Challenge Arbitral Awards
فقدان الحق في الطعن بأحكام التحكيم
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv Dissertation
description This dissertation addresses the loss of the right to challenge arbitral awards, particularly on Article 4 of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, which embodies the principal of waiver to object, stating that a party that proceeds with arbitration without timely objecting to a known procedural irregularity under a non-mandatory provision or a violation of the arbitration agreement is deemed to have waived its right to object. Although this regulation improves procedural efficiency and finality, its interpretation and application have been inconsistent between jurisdictions. This study conducts a doctrinal and comparative analysis of Article 4 , examining its legal foundation, practical function, and interaction with other key provisions of the Model Law, namely Articles 16 and 34, which address jurisdictional objections and applications to set aside arbitral awards. The dissertation evaluates how the waiver rule has been viewed and applied in jurisdictions that have adopted the Model Law by thoroughly reviewing travaux préparatoires, national legislation, and relevant case law. It also examines the limitations of waiver, which is its application to mandatory vs non-mandatory rules and the extent to which waiver can be achieved through agreement between the parties. The comparisons conducted by this study reveal both harmonised interpretations and discrepancies that challenge the claimed consistency of the Model Law. This dissertation concludes by identifying deficiencies in the current structure of Article 4 and suggesting amendments to enhance its clarity, consistency, and procedural fairness in international arbitration.
id budr_c2ee3bab57f47925c0ec2ed967540d3e
identifier_str_mv 23000977
language_invalid_str_mv en
network_acronym_str budr
network_name_str The British University in Dubai repository
oai_identifier_str oai:bspace.buid.ac.ae:1234/3763
publishDate 2025
publisher.none.fl_str_mv British University In Dubai
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository_id_str
spelling Losing the Right to Challenge Arbitral Awardsفقدان الحق في الطعن بأحكام التحكيمGERGEOS, RANA GHASSANUNCITRAL Model Lawarbitral awardschallenging awardswaiver of right to objectparty autonomyMandatory and non-mandatory provisions.This dissertation addresses the loss of the right to challenge arbitral awards, particularly on Article 4 of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, which embodies the principal of waiver to object, stating that a party that proceeds with arbitration without timely objecting to a known procedural irregularity under a non-mandatory provision or a violation of the arbitration agreement is deemed to have waived its right to object. Although this regulation improves procedural efficiency and finality, its interpretation and application have been inconsistent between jurisdictions. This study conducts a doctrinal and comparative analysis of Article 4 , examining its legal foundation, practical function, and interaction with other key provisions of the Model Law, namely Articles 16 and 34, which address jurisdictional objections and applications to set aside arbitral awards. The dissertation evaluates how the waiver rule has been viewed and applied in jurisdictions that have adopted the Model Law by thoroughly reviewing travaux préparatoires, national legislation, and relevant case law. It also examines the limitations of waiver, which is its application to mandatory vs non-mandatory rules and the extent to which waiver can be achieved through agreement between the parties. The comparisons conducted by this study reveal both harmonised interpretations and discrepancies that challenge the claimed consistency of the Model Law. This dissertation concludes by identifying deficiencies in the current structure of Article 4 and suggesting amendments to enhance its clarity, consistency, and procedural fairness in international arbitration.British University In DubaiDr Alhyari, Omar2026-01-26T09:07:37Z2025-06Dissertationapplication/pdf23000977https://bspace.buid.ac.ae/handle/1234/3763enoai:bspace.buid.ac.ae:1234/37632026-01-26T09:09:11Z
spellingShingle Losing the Right to Challenge Arbitral Awards
GERGEOS, RANA GHASSAN
UNCITRAL Model Law
arbitral awards
challenging awards
waiver of right to object
party autonomy
Mandatory and non-mandatory provisions.
title Losing the Right to Challenge Arbitral Awards
title_full Losing the Right to Challenge Arbitral Awards
title_fullStr Losing the Right to Challenge Arbitral Awards
title_full_unstemmed Losing the Right to Challenge Arbitral Awards
title_short Losing the Right to Challenge Arbitral Awards
title_sort Losing the Right to Challenge Arbitral Awards
topic UNCITRAL Model Law
arbitral awards
challenging awards
waiver of right to object
party autonomy
Mandatory and non-mandatory provisions.
url https://bspace.buid.ac.ae/handle/1234/3763