"\u003chtml xmlns:o=\"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office\"\r\nxmlns:w=\"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word\"\r\nxmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40\"\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003chead\u003e\r\n\u003cmeta http-equiv=Content-Type content=\"text/html; charset=windows-1252\"\u003e\r\n\u003cmeta name=ProgId content=Word.Document\u003e\r\n\u003cmeta name=Generator content=\"Microsoft Word 11\"\u003e\r\n\u003cmeta name=Originator content=\"Microsoft Word 11\"\u003e\r\n\u003clink rel=File-List href=\"2008J10_files/filelist.xml\"\u003e\r\n\u003ctitle\u003eINTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION IN THE CONTEXT OF\u003c/title\u003e\r\n\u003c!--[if gte mso 9]\u003e\u003cxml\u003e\r\n \u003co:DocumentProperties\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Author\u003eOratier\u003c/o:Author\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Template\u003eNormal\u003c/o:Template\u003e\r\n  \u003co:LastAuthor\u003eOratier\u003c/o:LastAuthor\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Revision\u003e2\u003c/o:Revision\u003e\r\n  \u003co:TotalTime\u003e0\u003c/o:TotalTime\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Created\u003e2015-01-24T06:43:00Z\u003c/o:Created\u003e\r\n  \u003co:LastSaved\u003e2015-01-24T06:43:00Z\u003c/o:LastSaved\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Pages\u003e1\u003c/o:Pages\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Words\u003e3531\u003c/o:Words\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Characters\u003e20132\u003c/o:Characters\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Company\u003eOratier\u003c/o:Company\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Lines\u003e167\u003c/o:Lines\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Paragraphs\u003e47\u003c/o:Paragraphs\u003e\r\n  \u003co:CharactersWithSpaces\u003e23616\u003c/o:CharactersWithSpaces\u003e\r\n  \u003co:Version\u003e11.5606\u003c/o:Version\u003e\r\n \u003c/o:DocumentProperties\u003e\r\n\u003c/xml\u003e\u003c![endif]--\u003e\u003c!--[if gte mso 9]\u003e\u003cxml\u003e\r\n \u003cw:WordDocument\u003e\r\n  \u003cw:DoNotHyphenateCaps/\u003e\r\n  \u003cw:PunctuationKerning/\u003e\r\n  \u003cw:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing\u003e6 pt\u003c/w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing\u003e\r\n  \u003cw:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing\u003e6 pt\u003c/w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing\u003e\r\n  \u003cw:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery\u003e0\u003c/w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery\u003e\r\n  \u003cw:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery\u003e3\u003c/w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery\u003e\r\n  \u003cw:UseMarginsForDrawingGridOrigin/\u003e\r\n  \u003cw:ValidateAgainstSchemas\u003efalse\u003c/w:ValidateAgainstSchemas\u003e\r\n  \u003cw:SaveIfXMLInvalid\u003efalse\u003c/w:SaveIfXMLInvalid\u003e\r\n  \u003cw:IgnoreMixedContent\u003efalse\u003c/w:IgnoreMixedContent\u003e\r\n  \u003cw:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText\u003efalse\u003c/w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText\u003e\r\n  \u003cw:DoNotUnderlineInvalidXML/\u003e\r\n  \u003cw:DoNotShadeFormData/\u003e\r\n  \u003cw:Compatibility\u003e\r\n   \u003cw:FootnoteLayoutLikeWW8/\u003e\r\n   \u003cw:ShapeLayoutLikeWW8/\u003e\r\n   \u003cw:AlignTablesRowByRow/\u003e\r\n   \u003cw:ForgetLastTabAlignment/\u003e\r\n   \u003cw:LayoutRawTableWidth/\u003e\r\n   \u003cw:LayoutTableRowsApart/\u003e\r\n   \u003cw:UseWord97LineBreakingRules/\u003e\r\n   \u003cw:SelectEntireFieldWithStartOrEnd/\u003e\r\n   \u003cw:UseWord2002TableStyleRules/\u003e\r\n  \u003c/w:Compatibility\u003e\r\n  \u003cw:BrowserLevel\u003eMicrosoftInternetExplorer4\u003c/w:BrowserLevel\u003e\r\n \u003c/w:WordDocument\u003e\r\n\u003c/xml\u003e\u003c![endif]--\u003e\u003c!--[if gte mso 9]\u003e\u003cxml\u003e\r\n \u003cw:LatentStyles DefLockedState=\"false\" LatentStyleCount=\"156\"\u003e\r\n \u003c/w:LatentStyles\u003e\r\n\u003c/xml\u003e\u003c![endif]--\u003e\r\n\u003cstyle\u003e\r\n\u003c!--\r\n /* Style Definitions */\r\n p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal\r\n\t{mso-style-parent:\"\";\r\n\tmargin:0in;\r\n\tmargin-bottom:.0001pt;\r\n\tmso-pagination:widow-orphan;\r\n\tfont-size:12.0pt;\r\n\tfont-family:\"Times New Roman\";\r\n\tmso-fareast-font-family:\"Times New Roman\";}\r\n /* Page Definitions */\r\n @page\r\n\t{mso-page-border-surround-header:no;\r\n\tmso-page-border-surround-footer:no;}\r\n@page Section1\r\n\t{size:8.5in 11.0in;\r\n\tmargin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;\r\n\tmso-header-margin:.5in;\r\n\tmso-footer-margin:.5in;\r\n\tmso-paper-source:0;}\r\ndiv.Section1\r\n\t{page:Section1;}\r\n--\u003e\r\n\u003c/style\u003e\r\n\u003c!--[if gte mso 10]\u003e\r\n\u003cstyle\u003e\r\n /* Style Definitions */\r\n table.MsoNormalTable\r\n\t{mso-style-name:\"Table Normal\";\r\n\tmso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;\r\n\tmso-tstyle-colband-size:0;\r\n\tmso-style-noshow:yes;\r\n\tmso-style-parent:\"\";\r\n\tmso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;\r\n\tmso-para-margin:0in;\r\n\tmso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;\r\n\tmso-pagination:widow-orphan;\r\n\tfont-size:10.0pt;\r\n\tfont-family:\"Times New Roman\";\r\n\tmso-ansi-language:#0400;\r\n\tmso-fareast-language:#0400;\r\n\tmso-bidi-language:#0400;}\r\n\u003c/style\u003e\r\n\u003c![endif]--\u003e\r\n\u003c/head\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cbody lang=EN-US style=\u0027tab-interval:.5in;text-justify-trim:punctuation\u0027\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cdiv class=Section1\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal align=center style=\u0027text-align:center;mso-pagination:none;\r\nmso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n-.2pt\u0027\u003eINTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION IN THE CONTEXT OF\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal align=center style=\u0027text-align:center;mso-pagination:none;\r\nmso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n-.2pt\u0027\u003eGLOBALIZATION: A PAKISTANI PERSPECTIVE\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal align=center style=\u0027text-align:center;mso-pagination:none;\r\nmso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n-.2pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal align=center style=\u0027text-align:center;mso-pagination:none;\r\nmso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cb\u003eBy\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal align=center style=\u0027text-align:center;mso-pagination:none;\r\nmso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal align=center style=\u0027text-align:center;mso-pagination:none;\r\nmso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cb\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n-.1pt\u0027\u003eMr. Justice Mian Saqib Nisar,\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal align=center style=\u0027text-align:center;mso-pagination:none;\r\nmso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cb\u003eJudge, Lahore High Court\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.35pt\u0027\u003eArbitration, that\r\nis, the resolution of disputes by a \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.2pt\u0027\u003eforum\r\nsettled upon by the mutual agreement of the parties to a \u003c/span\u003edispute or\r\notherwise agreeable to them, has an ancient lineage \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.25pt\u0027\u003eand rich heritage in the sub-continent in the shape of the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003epanchayat system. Even after the advent of British\r\nrule, the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.1pt\u0027\u003epanchayat system continued\r\nto flourish and it was observed in \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.2pt\u0027\u003e1927\r\nby the Bombay High Court that \u0026quot;to refer matters to a \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.25pt\u0027\u003epanch is one of the natural ways of deciding many\r\na disputes in \u003c/span\u003eIndia.\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0B5EE5\u0027\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027color:#0B5EE5\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003eThe form .of\r\narbitration more recognizable by modern \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.05pt\u0027\u003eeyes started in the sub-continent essentially with the Indian \u003c/span\u003eArbitration\r\nAct, 1899. This was, however, a statute of limited \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.25pt\u0027\u003escope, applicable only to the Presidency towns of Madras, \u003c/span\u003eBombay\r\nand Calcutta and such other towns in India as were \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n-.25pt\u0027\u003enotified for the purposes of the Act. In 1908, a new Code of Civil \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003eProcedure, applicable to the whole of the British\r\nIndia, was \u003c/span\u003eenacted, and a provision was made for arbitration in its\r\nsecond\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0B5EE5;\r\nletter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003e1. Chanbasappa Gurushantappa Hiremath v. Baslingayya\r\nGokurnaya \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0B5EE5\u0027\u003eHiremath AIR 1927\r\nBombay 565, 568-9\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.15pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.15pt\u0027\u003eschedule though\r\nonly in respect of pending suits. Thus, it was, \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n-.1pt\u0027\u003einitially a piecemeal approach to making arbitration part of the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003ecorpus of laws. Recommendations and suggestions\r\nwere made, \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003emost prominently by the\r\nCivil Justice Committee in 1925, to \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003eprovide\r\nfor a new and comprehensive Arbitration Act. However, \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003eit was not until 1940 that the appropriate Act was\r\npassed by \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.25pt\u0027\u003ethe Indian Legislative\r\nAssembly. The Arbitration Act, 1940 \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003eremains\r\nin force in Pakistan till today. It was in force in India \u003c/span\u003etill 1996.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:1.45pt\u0027\u003eAlthough Pakistan\r\nand India were, prior to \u003c/span\u003eIndependence in 1947, part of the British\r\nEmpire, British India \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.35pt\u0027\u003ewas nonetheless\r\nrecognized as a distinct entity under the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n-.15pt\u0027\u003einternational law for certain purposes. In that capacity it was a \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003esignatory to the Geneva Protocol on Arbitration\r\nClauses of 1923 \u003c/span\u003eand the Geneva Convention on the Execution of Foreign\r\nAwards \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.2pt\u0027\u003eof 1927. In 1937, an Act known as the\r\nArbitration (Protocol and \u003c/span\u003eConvention) Act, 1937, was passed by the\r\nIndian legislature to \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003egive effect to the\r\ninternational arbitration agreements. Thus, \u003c/span\u003ethree years before having a\r\nstatute that comprehensively dealt \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003ewith\r\ndomestic arbitrations, British India had in place an Act \u003c/span\u003edealing\r\ndirectly with international commercial arbitrations. The \u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003eAct of 1937 continued to be in force in Pakistan\r\nafter 1947. \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.55pt\u0027\u003eAlthough, Pakistan became\r\na signatory to the New York \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003eArbitration\r\nConvention of 1958 on December 30th of that year, \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.2pt\u0027\u003eit was not until July, 2005 that the Convention was\r\nmade a \u003c/span\u003epart of the Pakistani; laws by the promulgation of an Ordinance \u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003eto give effect to the same. Thus, the common law\r\nin respect of \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.1pt\u0027\u003einternational\r\narbitrations and foreign awards has developed in \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.15pt\u0027\u003ePakistan almost exclusively with reference to the Act of 1937 \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.25pt\u0027\u003eand to a certain extent the Act of 1940, and it is\r\nonly very \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003erecently that the courts\r\nhave begun to deal with issues arising \u003c/span\u003eunder the New York Convention.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.4pt\u0027\u003ePakistani courts\r\nhave, by and large, supported the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003edecision\r\nof parties to submit their dispute for resolution by a \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003edomestic forum of their own choice, especially the\r\none having \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003ean international\r\ndimension. This approach is reflected in their \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.1pt\u0027\u003ereluctance to interfere with the arbitral process or to overturn \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.65pt\u0027\u003eor upset arbitration awards. The courts have\r\nsparingly \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003eexercised the statutory\r\npowers vested in them in this regard. \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.2pt\u0027\u003eThe\r\nbasic judicial approach has been to hold the parties to their \u003c/span\u003ebargain,\r\nand to enforce the arbitration agreement in letter and \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.05pt\u0027\u003espirit to ensure the sanctity of the arbitral process. Thus, if a \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003eparty to an arbitration agreement attempts to\r\ninstitute legal \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.2pt\u0027\u003eproceedings in a\r\ncourt of law, and the other side seeks a stay of \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.15pt\u0027\u003eproceedings on the ground that recourse should be made to \u003c/span\u003earbitration,\r\nthe courts have generally been quick to allow such \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n-.05pt\u0027\u003ean application. The desire to uphold the arbitration agreement, \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.35pt\u0027\u003eand force the parties to resolve their dispute\r\nthrough the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003edomestic forum selected\r\nby them is all the more pronounced in \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.15pt\u0027\u003ethe\r\ncase of arbitration agreements where one of the parties is a \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003eforeign national or entity. The judicial attitude\r\nof Pakistani \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003ecourts in this regard\r\nis aptly reflected in the concurring opinion \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n-.15pt\u0027\u003eof Mr. Justice Ajmal Mian (as he then was) in a decision of the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.25pt\u0027\u003eSupreme Court of Pakistan in 1993. His\r\nobservations may to be \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.2pt\u0027\u003equoted as under:\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027color:#0070C0\u0027\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:\r\nnone;mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.15pt\u0027\u003e\u0026quot;I may observe that while dealing with an application \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003eunder section 34 of the Arbitration Act in\r\nrelation to a \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.35pt\u0027\u003eforeign arbitration\r\nclause like the one in issue, the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003ecourt\u0027s\r\napproach should be dynamic and it should bear \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n-.05pt\u0027\u003ein mind that unless there are some compelling reasons, \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.45pt\u0027\u003esuch an arbitration clause should be honoured as \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003egenerally the other party to such an arbitration\r\nclause is \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.25pt\u0027\u003ea foreign party. With the\r\ndevelopment and growth of \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.95pt\u0027\u003eInternational\r\nTrade and Commerce and due to \u003c/span\u003emodernization of Communication/ Transport\r\nSystem in \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003ethe world, the contracts\r\ncontaining such an arbitration \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003eclause\r\nare very common nowadays. The rule that the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.1pt\u0027\u003ecourt should not lightly release the parties from their \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003ebargain, that follows from the sanctity which the\r\nCourt \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003eattaches to contracts, must be\r\napplied with more vigor \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.15pt\u0027\u003eto a\r\ncontract containing a foreign arbitration clause. We \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.1pt\u0027\u003eshould not overlook the fact that any breach of a\r\nterm of \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003esuch a contract to which a\r\nforeign company or person is a party, will tarnish the image of Pakistan in the\r\ncomity \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.15pt\u0027\u003eof nations. A ground, which\r\ncould be in contemplation of \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.4pt\u0027\u003eparty at\r\nthe time of entering into the contract as a prudent man of business, cannot\r\nfurnish basis for \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003erefusal to stay\u0027\r\nthe suit under section 34 of the Act. So, \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.15pt\u0027\u003ethe ground, like that it would be difficult to carry the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.2pt\u0027\u003evoluminous evidence or numerous witnesses to a\r\nforeign \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003ecountry for arbitration\r\nproceedings or that it would be \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003etoo\r\nexpensive or that the subject-matter of the contract \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.25pt\u0027\u003eis in Pakistan or that the breach of the contract\r\nhas \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.1pt\u0027\u003etaken place in Pakistan, in my\r\nview, cannot be a sound \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.3pt\u0027\u003eground for\r\nrefusal to stay a suit filed in Pakistan in \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.45pt\u0027\u003ebreach of a foreign arbitration clause contained in \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003econtract of the nature referred to hereinabove. In\r\norder \u003c/span\u003eto deprive a foreign party to have arbitration in a foreign\r\ncountry in the manner provided for in the contract, the \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n1.1pt\u0027\u003ecourt should come to the conclusion that the \u003c/span\u003eenforcement of such\r\nan arbitration clause would be \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003eunconscionable\r\nor would amount to forcing the plaintiff \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.7pt\u0027\u003eto honour a different contract, which was not in \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003econtemplation of the parties and which could not\r\nhave \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.65pt\u0027\u003ebeen in their contemplation as a\r\nprudent man of \u003c/span\u003ebusiness.\u0026quot;\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:\r\nnone;mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.2pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.2pt\u0027\u003eAs noted above,\r\nmost foreign awards that have come for \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003eenforcement\r\nbefore Pakistani courts have been filed under the \u003c/span\u003eAct of 1937. Such\r\nawards have almost always been upheld and \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.1pt\u0027\u003ethe\r\nCourts have invariably rejected challenges and objections to \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003etheir enforcement by the defendants. It is only in\r\nrare cases, \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.45pt\u0027\u003ewhere the objection is of\r\nsuch a nature that the defect is \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003efloating\r\non the face of the award, that the Courts have upheld \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003ethe objection and declined to enforce the award.\r\nThis amply \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003edemonstrates that\r\nPakistani courts are fully cognizant of, and \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n-.15pt\u0027\u003esensitive to, the international dimension of contracts containing \u003c/span\u003eforeign\r\narbitration clauses or in which the opposite party is a \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n-.15pt\u0027\u003eforeign entity. The courts have chosen not just to hold parties to \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003etheir bargain (which may simply be regarded as an\r\naspect of the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003elaw of contract) but\r\nhave, in effect, taken a policy decision to \u003c/span\u003euphold Pakistan\u0027s position\r\nin the comity of nations by insisting \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.25pt\u0027\u003eon the\r\ndue enforcement of foreign awards. Pakistani courts \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.45pt\u0027\u003ehave thus moved in stride with the growing\r\ninternational \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003econsensus and this is\r\nall the more pertinent, given the fact that \u003c/span\u003ethis has been done in the\r\ncontext of the Acts of 1937 and 1940 \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.25pt\u0027\u003eand not\r\nunder the New York Convention, a point to which I \u003c/span\u003eshall return later.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.6pt\u0027\u003eIn the present\r\ncontext, an interesting case is the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003edecision\r\nof the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the year 2000 in the case titled Hub Power\r\nCompany Limited v. WAPDA.\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0;\r\nletter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003e The Hub Power\r\nCompany (\u0026quot;Hubco\u0026quot;) was supplying electrical power to WAPDA, the public\r\nsector utility, under a power purchase \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003eagreement.\r\nThe agreement had an arbitration clause providing \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.4pt\u0027\u003efor ICC arbitration at London. Dispute arose\r\nbetween the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003eparties, and Hubco wished\r\nto refer the matter to arbitration. \u003c/span\u003eWAPDA opposed this move on the\r\nground that the issues raised \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003eby it, which\r\nwere serious allegations of corruption, fraud and \u003c/span\u003emala fide, were not\r\narbitrable. The matter was heard by a five \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003emember\r\nBench of the Supreme Court, and by a bare majority, \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003eWAPDA\u0027s contention was upheld. However, the\r\nmajority was \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.6pt\u0027\u003ecareful to note expressly\r\nthat the dispute raised was not\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003e\r\ncommercial in nature. The matter primarily related to the very existence of a\r\nvalid contract and not the dispute under such a \u003c/span\u003econtract. It was held\r\nthat such matter, according to the public \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003epolicy,\r\nrequired finding about the alleged criminality and was \u003c/span\u003enot referable to\r\narbitration.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.6pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0;\r\nletter-spacing:.4pt\u0027\u003e3. PLD 2000 SC 841 \u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.6pt\u0027\u003eA brief overview of\r\nthe Act of 1937 indicates that \u003c/span\u003ePakistani courts have not been lax in\r\nupholding and enforcing what have been regarded as Pakistan\u0027s international\r\nobligations \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.3pt\u0027\u003ein respect of arbitration\r\nagreements and foreign awards in terms of the principles enunciated by the\r\nsuperior Courts. \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003eHowever, the Geneva\r\nConvention and Protocol was superseded \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.4pt\u0027\u003eby\r\nNew York Convention of 1958, which provided a better \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003echoice of forum for the enforcement of foreign\r\nawards. Indeed, \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.1pt\u0027\u003eRedfern \u0026amp; Hunter,\r\nregarded by many as the leading treatise on \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.1pt\u0027\u003einternational commercial arbitration,\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:11.0pt;\r\ncolor:#0070C0;letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003e\r\ndescribes the Geneva \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003eConvention and\r\nProtocol as merely the \u0026quot;first step on the road \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.85pt\u0027\u003etowards international recognition and enforcement\r\nof \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003einternational arbitration\r\nagreements and awards\u0026quot;\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0;\r\nletter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003e. The New \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003eYork Convention, on the other hand, is described\r\nby the same \u003c/span\u003eauthors as:--\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u0026quot;the most important international treaty\r\nrelating to \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003einternational commercial\r\narbitration. Indeed, it may be \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.65pt\u0027\u003eregarded\r\nas a major factor in the development of \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.15pt\u0027\u003earbitration as a means of resolving international trade \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.2pt\u0027\u003edisputes\u0026quot;.\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;\r\ncolor:#0070C0;letter-spacing:-.2pt\u0027\u003e6\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.2pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.2pt\u0027\u003eThe learned\r\nauthors, Redfern \u0026amp; Hunter, also describe \u003c/span\u003ethe Convention as\r\nfollows:--\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:\r\nnone;mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u0026quot;It has been\r\ndescribed as \u0027the most important pillar on \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003ewhich\r\nthe edifice of international arbitration rests\u0027 and \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.2pt\u0027\u003eas a Convention which \u0027perhaps could lay claim to\r\nbe \u003c/span\u003ethe most effective instance of international legislation in \u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003ethe entire history of commercial law\u0027.\u0026quot;\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0;letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003eThe New York\r\nConvention has been ratified by around \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.2pt\u0027\u003e137\r\ncountries in the world, and as already noted, Pakistan itself \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003ebecame a signatory to the Convention as early as\r\nin 1958. India \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003ealso became a\r\nsignatory to the Convention in 1958 and passed\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0\u0027\u003e4.\r\nRedfern \u0026amp; Hunter, et.al., Law and practice of International Commercial\r\nArbitration, 4th ed., 2004.\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0;\r\nletter-spacing:1.1pt\u0027\u003e5. At para 1-146.\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0;\r\nletter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003e6. At para 1-147. See also, Russell on Arbitration, 24th\r\ned., 2003, at para, \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0\u0027\u003e1-037.\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0;\r\nletter-spacing:1.1pt\u0027\u003e7. At para 10-23. \u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:1.1pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003ethe relevant\r\nlegislation in 1961. All the countries which were \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.35pt\u0027\u003esignatory to the Geneva Protocol and Convention\r\nenforced \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.7pt\u0027\u003ethrough the Act of 1937 are\r\nalso party to the New York \u003c/span\u003eConvention. For various reasons, the\r\nConvention could not be incorporated into Pakistan\u0027s municipal law for a long\r\ntime, and this deficiency was being felt increasingly. It was not until 2005 \u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003ethat an Ordinance was finally promulgated to give\r\neffect to the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.25pt\u0027\u003eConvention. Under our\r\nConstitution, an Ordinance has the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003esame\r\neffect as an Act of the Parliament, but lapses after four \u003c/span\u003emonths. An Act\r\nis yet to be passed by the Parliament to give a \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.1pt\u0027\u003epermanent legal effect to the Convention. So far, it appears to \u003c/span\u003ehave\r\nbeen kept alive as part of the municipal law by means of \u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003esuccessive Ordinances issued from time to time.\r\nThe last such \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003eOrdinance as available\r\nto me was promulgated on 2nd June, \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.1pt\u0027\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027font-size:9.0pt;color:#0070C0;letter-spacing:-.1pt\u0027\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.1pt\u0027\u003e and one hopes that the Parliament will take\r\nappropriate \u003c/span\u003eLegislative action in the\u003csup\u003e-\u003c/sup\u003e matter, as soon as\r\npossible; otherwise, the constitutionality of the law may remain under a cloud.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:1.1pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.15pt\u0027\u003eThe first point\r\nto note about the Ordinance enforcing the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.25pt\u0027\u003eNew York Convention is that, subject to certain savings, it \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003erepeals the Act of 1937. The intent behind the\r\nrepeal is clear. \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.2pt\u0027\u003eThe New York\r\nConvention, and hence the Ordinance, makes \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n-.15pt\u0027\u003eany challenge to the enforcement of an international award even \u003c/span\u003emore\r\ndifficult as compared to the Act of 1937. The repeal of the \u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.15pt\u0027\u003eAct of 1937, therefore, removes the possibility\r\nof any overlap or \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003eduality since all\r\nforeign awards and international arbitration agreements are placed on the same\r\nfooting, having been made \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003ethe\r\nsubject matter of the New York Convention.\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;\r\ncolor:#0070C0;letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.2pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.2pt\u0027\u003eThe Second\r\nimportant feature of the Ordinance is that it \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.15pt\u0027\u003econfers exclusive jurisdiction with regard to its subject-matter \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.35pt\u0027\u003eon the High Courts directly. In Pakistan, the High\r\nCourts, \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.45pt\u0027\u003esubject to a few exceptions,\r\ndo not have the original civil \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.25pt\u0027\u003ejurisdiction.\r\nLegal proceedings, in general, commence in the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.65pt\u0027\u003ecivil courts subordinate to the High Courts. By directly \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.2pt\u0027\u003econferring jurisdiction on the High Courts, in\r\ncontrast to the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003eAct of 1937, where\r\njurisdiction was vested in the Civil Courts, \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.4pt\u0027\u003ethe Ordinance has eliminated altogether one level of legal \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003eproceedings and is, therefore, likely to speed up\r\nthe process of\u003c/span\u003e international arbitration and enforcement of foreign\r\nawards to a greater extent.\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0\u0027\u003e8. \u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.25pt\u0027\u003eRecognition and Enforcement (Arbitration\r\nAgreements and Foreign \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003eArbitral\r\nAwards) Ordinance, 2007, Ordinance No.XXV of 2007 reported at 2007 \u003c/span\u003eCLD\r\n(Federal Statutes) 538 = PLD 2008 Federal Statutes 251.\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0;\r\nletter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003e9. It may be noted that paragraph 2 of Article VII of the\r\nConvention also \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0;letter-spacing:\r\n.2pt\u0027\u003eprovides that the Geneva Convention and Protocol \u0026quot;shall cease to\r\nhave effect \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0;letter-spacing:\r\n.25pt\u0027\u003ebetween Contracting States on their becoming bound and to the extent\r\nthey \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0;letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003ebecome\r\nbound\u0026quot; by the Convention.\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:1.05pt\u0027\u003eThirdly, the\r\nOrdinance also contains a highly \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.2pt\u0027\u003eunconventional\r\nprovision in terms of section 8, whereby the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n-.05pt\u0027\u003eNew York Convention has been incorporated into the municipal \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003elaw, being a Schedule to the Ordinance. Section 8\r\nexpressly provides that in the event of any inconsistency between the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003eConvention on one hand and the Ordinance itself or\r\nany other \u003c/span\u003elaw or any judgment of any court on the other, the Convention \u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003eshall prevail to the extent of inconsistency. This\r\nis the most \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.8pt\u0027\u003eunusual provision. It is a\r\nwell-established rule of the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003einterpretation\r\nof statutes that in case of any conflict between \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n-.05pt\u0027\u003ethe main part of a statute and any schedule thereto, the main \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.2pt\u0027\u003eprovisions (i.e., the sections) should prevail. It\r\nis also well-\u003c/span\u003esettled that any conflict between any treaty provision and\r\nthe \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003emunicipal law should be resolved in\r\nfavour of the latter. Section \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003e8 of\r\nthe Ordinance thus reverses both these rules to support \u003c/span\u003ethe New York\r\nConvention.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003eIt will, therefore, be seen that an attempt has been\r\nmade \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.2pt\u0027\u003ein promulgating the Ordinance to tilt\r\nthe field in favour of the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003eNew York\r\nConvention and awards made thereunder. Original \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n-.2pt\u0027\u003ejurisdiction in civil matters is sparingly conferred upon the High \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.6pt\u0027\u003eCourts by the laws of Pakistan.\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027font-size:9.0pt;color:#0070C0;letter-spacing:.6pt\u0027\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.6pt\u0027\u003e It is hard to find any \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.15pt\u0027\u003eother treaty, convention or international\r\nobligation in respect of \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003ewhich such a\r\njurisdiction has been conferred upon the High \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.65pt\u0027\u003eCourts in Pakistan. Furthermore, by reversing rules of \u003c/span\u003einterpretation,\r\nwhich most Pakistani lawyers would regard as \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003ebedrock\r\nprinciples in favour of the Convention; the Ordinance \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.5pt\u0027\u003ehas placed the Convention on a footing well-above\r\nother \u003c/span\u003einternational\u003csup\u003e-\u003c/sup\u003e treaties and obligations. One is not\r\nlikely to find \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.3pt\u0027\u003eany other law on the statute\r\nbooks in which a schedule is \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003eplaced\r\non a pedestal higher than the parent Act itself. While \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.95pt\u0027\u003ethese provisions yet to be judicially interpreted\r\nand \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003eapplied, the legislative intent\r\nclearly points towards giving the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.45pt\u0027\u003eConvention\r\nan unprecedented primacy with regard to its \u003c/span\u003eenforcement.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.1pt\u0027\u003eLike the Act of\r\n1937, the Ordinance concerns itself with \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.15pt\u0027\u003elegal proceedings brought in Pakistan, notwithstanding the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003eexistence of an international arbitration\r\nagreement, and the enforcement of foreign awards in Pakistan. However, there\r\nare\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0;\r\nletter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003e10. The ordinary original jurisdiction exercised by the\r\nHigh Court of Sindh \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0\u0027\u003eis\r\nlimited to the Civil Division of Karachi (i.e., it does not extend to the whole\r\nof \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003ethe Province of Sindh) and is essentially\r\nan historical anomaly stemming from \u003c/span\u003ethe Court\u0027s origins as the Chief\r\nCourt of Sindh in pre-Independence days.\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003esignificant\r\ndifferences in the language of tile relevant provisions \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.95pt\u0027\u003ein both the statutes. With regard to the stay of\r\nlegal \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.3pt\u0027\u003eproceedings, section 3 of the\r\nAct of 1937 contained certain \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003eprocedural\r\nrestrictions. In effect, the section required that an \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003eapplication seeking a stay of the proceedings had\r\nto be made \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003ebefore the filing of the\r\nwritten statement or the taking of any other steps in the legal proceedings,\r\nand if not so made, the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:1.0pt\u0027\u003eapplication\r\nwould not be maintainable and the legal \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.6pt\u0027\u003eproceedings would continue. This was a fairly technical \u003c/span\u003erequirement\r\nand had all equivalent provision in the Arbitration \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.85pt\u0027\u003eAct, 1940 around which a whole body of case-law has \u003c/span\u003edeveloped. As\r\nsometimes happens in such circumstances, the \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003eresultant\r\nposition is neither wholly consistent nor satisfactory. \u003c/span\u003eThis procedural\r\nrestriction or requirement has been eliminated \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.2pt\u0027\u003efrom the Ordinance,\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0;\r\nletter-spacing:.2pt\u0027\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.2pt\u0027\u003e and this is in\r\nline with paragraph 3 of \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.75pt\u0027\u003eArticle II\r\nof the Convention. In principle, therefore, an \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.55pt\u0027\u003eapplication for the stay of proceedings can be made in a \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003eConvention case at any stage of the legal\r\nproceedings and while \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003eit is possible,\r\nfor instance, that the courts may not allow such \u003c/span\u003ean application near the\r\nconclusion of the proceedings it is clear \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003ethat\r\nthe filing of this type of an application has been freed from \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003ethe procedural restrictions and given a much more\r\nextended \u003c/span\u003etimeframe.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.65pt\u0027\u003eSection 4(2) of\r\nthe Ordinance provides that if an \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003eapplication\r\nfor stay of legal proceedings is made, then unless \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.4pt\u0027\u003ethe arbitration agreement is null and void,\r\ninoperative or \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.25pt\u0027\u003eincapable of being\r\nperformed, the court shall refer the parties to \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n-.05pt\u0027\u003earbitration, i.e. stay the legal proceedings. This provision was \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.1pt\u0027\u003erecently considered by the High Court of Sindh \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0;letter-spacing:-.1pt\u0027\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.1pt\u0027\u003e and the Court \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.4pt\u0027\u003eheld that under the Ordinance, the court did not have any \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003ediscretionary powers, but had to refer the matter\r\nto arbitration \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.45pt\u0027\u003eunless certain limited\r\nexceptions were applicable. In other \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003ewords,\r\nthe provision was held to be mandatory.\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.55pt\u0027\u003eThrough the\r\nOrdinance, the enforcement of foreign \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003eawards\r\nhas also been much simplified and the legal framework \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003estrengthened in favour of the award. The detailed\r\nprovision in \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003ethis regard is contained\r\nin section 7 of the Act of 1937. The \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.35pt\u0027\u003eequivalent\r\nprovision under the Ordinance \u003cspan style=\u0027color:#0070C0\u0027\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e simply and \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003esuccinctly states that the enforcement of foreign\r\nawards \u0026quot;shall\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0;\r\nletter-spacing:.2pt\u0027\u003e11. See section 4(1).\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0\u0027\u003e12.\r\nTravel Automation (Pvt.) Limited v. Abacus International (Pvt.) Limited and\r\nothers 2006 CLD 497.\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0;\r\nletter-spacing:.2pt\u0027\u003e13. See section 7.\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003eNot be refused\r\nexcept in accordance with Article V of the Convention\u0026quot;. Article V contains\r\nspecific grounds on the basis of which enforcement of an award may be refused.\r\nSince the Ordinance does not, unlike section 7(3) of the Act of 1937 confer any\r\nresiduary discretion on the court to refuse enforcement, it follows that the\r\ngrounds listed in Article V are exhaustive. Furthermore, Article V provides\r\nthat the court \u0026quot;may\u0026quot; refuse enforcement if any of the grounds do\r\nexist. In other words, the court may nonetheless order enforcement of the award\r\neven if the party challenging the same is able to make out a case under Article\r\nV. Again, this is unlike the Act of 1937 where subsections (1) and (2) of\r\nsection 7 were mandatory and non compliance with the provisions thereof meant\r\nthat the award would not be enforced. The court now has a discretion pointing\r\nin the opposite direction. The Convention, and hence the Ordinance, can be said\r\na have a \u0026quot; pro-enforcement\u0026quot; bias and a strong case can be made out\r\nthat the grounds under Article V are to be applied restrictively and construed\r\nnarrowly.\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#130BB5;letter-spacing:\r\n.15pt\u0027\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003eA ground listed in\r\nArticle V which entitles (but, as already noted, does not require) the court to\r\nrefuse enforcement is if such enforcement would be contrary to the public\r\npolicy of the country in which enforcement is sought. One may, perhaps in view\r\nof the majority judgment of the Supreme court of Pakistan in the Hubco case,\r\nhave apprehensions with regard to the enforcement of foreign awards under the\r\nOrdinance However, I feel that such concerns would be exaggerated.\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003eThe attitude of\r\nPakistani Courts, in my view, would be in line with the approach taken by the\r\nSupreme court in the above-noted Eckhardt case. The views expressed by Mr.\r\nJustice Ajmal Mian in that case in his concurring opinion have already been\r\ncited. Like the courts of most common law countries, the Courts of Pakistan\r\nalso take a skeptical view of the \u0026quot;public policy\u0026quot; defence, and\r\nalthough it does succeed from time to time, both in Pakistan and other\r\njurisdiction \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#130BB5;letter-spacing:\r\n.15pt\u0027\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003e, it cannot be regarded as a\r\n\u0026quot;back-door\u0026quot; through which the efficacy and application of the New\r\nYork Convention could be undermined. I am confident that the Pakistani\r\nexperience will be in line with the general international trends.\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#130BB5;\r\nletter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003e14. Redfern \u0026amp; Hunter, op. cit., paras 10-34 and\r\n10-35.\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#130BB5;\r\nletter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#130BB5;\r\nletter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003e15. As an example from England in the specific context of\r\nArticle V of the Convention, see Soleimany [1999] 3 All E.R. 847, CA.\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003eNo discussion on\r\ninternational commercial arbitrations \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003ein\r\nthe Pakistani context can be complete without a reference to \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.1pt\u0027\u003ethe well-known decision of the Supreme Court in\r\nthe case titled \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003eHitachi Limited and\r\nanother v. Rupali Polyester and others.\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;\r\ncolor:#0070C0;letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003e\r\nIt \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.2pt\u0027\u003ewas held in this case that as\r\nregards arbitration proceedings \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003eand\r\nmatters relating thereto, the same would be governed by \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003ethe law of the seat of arbitration. Moreover, the\r\ncourts having \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.8pt\u0027\u003enexus to the seat of\r\narbitration would have territorial \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.3pt\u0027\u003ejurisdiction\r\nin such matters. Accordingly, Pakistani courts \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.25pt\u0027\u003ewould not claim jurisdiction simply because the arbitration \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003eagreement was governed by the Pakistani law.\r\nHowever, insofar \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003eas the\r\npost-arbitration stage was concerned, the Supreme Court \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.3pt\u0027\u003eheld that the interim award could be challenged\r\nbefore the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003ePakistani courts because\r\nthe arbitration agreement and main \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.65pt\u0027\u003econtract\r\nwere governed by the laws of Pakistan and the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.15pt\u0027\u003etransaction had its closest connection with this country. The \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.55pt\u0027\u003ecourt has, therefore, taken a view which is\r\nintermediary \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.3pt\u0027\u003ebetween the\r\n\u0026quot;seat\u0026quot; theory and the view taken by the Indian \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:-.05pt\u0027\u003eSups tine Court, and it remains to be seen\r\nwhether this view will \u003c/span\u003ebe affirmed if the court has any occasion to\r\nre-visit the issues \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:1.1pt\u0027\u003einvolved in some future\r\ncase. Besides, if a new and \u003c/span\u003ecomprehensive Arbitration Act is enacted by\r\nthe Parliament in \u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003ePakistan to replace the Act\r\nof 1940, a different approach then \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003emay\r\nalso be taken more in line with the \u0026quot;seat\u0026quot; theory, as has \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003ebeen done in other common law jurisdictions such\r\nas England \u003c/span\u003eand India.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.25pt\u0027\u003ePakistan and the\r\ncourts of this country have come a \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003elong\r\nway since the days of the enactments in 1937 and 1940. \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.35pt\u0027\u003eThe Ordinance enforcing the New York Convention\r\nmarks \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.2pt\u0027\u003emajor and welcome addition to\r\nthe development of international \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003ecommercial\r\narbitration and enforcement of foreign awards in \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n-.1pt\u0027\u003ePakistan. In one sense, however, it is not a fundamental shift in \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003ethe law. The reason is that the judicial\r\nprinciples and attitudes \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003ein this\r\ncountry have already evolved to a great extent in line \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.75pt\u0027\u003ewith international developments. In an important\r\nand \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.15pt\u0027\u003emeaningful sense, therefore, the\r\ncourts had already marched \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.6pt\u0027\u003efar in\r\nadvance of the Act of 1937. One can say that the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:\r\n.05pt\u0027\u003elegislature, somewhat belatedly, is now catching up with the \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\r\nstyle=\u0027letter-spacing:.1pt\u0027\u003ecourts. Pakistan is, therefore, well-placed to meet\r\nthe modern \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:.05pt\u0027\u003eday challenges and\r\nrequirements of dispute resolution in the \u003c/span\u003econtext of international\r\ncommercial law.\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027letter-spacing:-.5pt\u0027\u003e\u003co:p\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003cp class=MsoNormal style=\u0027text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;mso-layout-grid-align:\r\nnone;text-autospace:none\u0027\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0027font-size:10.0pt;color:#0070C0;\r\nletter-spacing:-.5pt\u0027\u003e16. 1998 SCMR 1618\u003co:p\u003e\u003c/o:p\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003c/div\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003c/body\u003e\r\n\r\n\u003c/html\u003e\r\n"