Facts of the case
The Law on Arbitration prohibits courts of general jurisdiction from overriding arbitration decisions or refusing to enforce an arbitration award on substantive grounds. Petitioner alleged that these provisions of the Law deprived her of her constitutional rights.
Question
In prohibiting courts of general jurisdiction from reviewing arbitration decisions on substantive grounds, do the provisions on Law on Arbitration limit petitioner’s right to judicial protection ( Article 13) and equality under the law (Article 14)?
Holding
No. While the Constitution of Kazakhstan guarantees individuals the right to judicial protection, it also enables individuals to choose alternative forms of dispute resolution. Individuals entering arbitration agreements exercise their right to freely enter contracts, and—by themselves—the limitations on the circumstances in which individuals can seek reversal of arbitration awards are not unconstitutional. The courts are empowered, under the Civil Code, to reverse an arbitration award when they are contrary to public policy. A proper interpretation of these provisions limits the grounds for such a reversal to circumstances where “foundations of legal order” are encroached upon. To minimize the the possibility of arbitrary interpretation of this provision, the government is ordered to consider further improvements to existing legislation.
Foreign Authorities Cited
Metadata
- Judges: Azimova (Chief); Sarsembaev (Rapporteur); Nurmukhanov; Eskendirov; Zhakipbaev; Zhatkanbayeva; Musin; Ongarbaev; Podoprigora; Kydyrbaeva; Udartsev
- Date: 13 September, 2024
- Link: Kiyasheva
DISCLAIMER:
- The website’s summary of the Court’s holding is made for educational purposes only, is not legal advice, and does not form an attorney-client relationship. The summary represents author’s interpretation of the decision, and may be incomplete or inaccurate. For the text of the decision, see the hyperlink above.