SRI LANKA Law and Practice Contributed by: Amrit Rajapakse, Law Chambers of Amrit Rajapakse
13. Miscellaneous 13.1 Class Action or Group Arbitration The Act does not provide for class action arbitration or group arbitration. It may be possible to consolidate arbitration proceedings by application of some insti - Attorneys-at-law of the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka are subject to ethical standards prescribed by the Supreme Court, which are found in the Supreme Court (Conduct of and Etiquette for Attorneys-at-Law) Rules 1988. There are no separate ethical codes or profes - sional standards that mandatorily apply to arbitrators in Sri Lanka. 13.3 Third-Party Funding tutional arbitration rules. 13.2 Ethical Codes The Act does not recognise third-party funding arrangements. Such arrangements are likely to breach domestic rules against maintenance and champerty. Accordingly, third-party funding arrangements are unlikely to be permitted in Sri Lanka. 13.4 Consolidation There is no provision in the Act that authorises an arbitral tribunal or court in Sri Lanka to consolidate separate arbitral proceedings. This could be done if all the parties agree to it, or agree on a set of arbitration
• The award concerns a matter not capable of settle - ment by arbitration. • Enforcement of the award would be contrary to public policy. In addition to the grounds mentioned above, a foreign award may also be refused recognition or enforce - ment if the award has not yet become binding on the parties or it has been set aside or suspended by a court in the seat of arbitration. Since the words “may be refused” appear in the section, it would follow that even an award that has been set aside by the courts in the seat of arbitration could be enforced in Sri Lanka. When a foreign award is subject to ongoing set-aside proceedings at the seat, the Sri Lankan court may adjourn the enforcement proceedings and may order the party resisting the enforcement application to pro - vide security (Section 34 (2)). Sri Lanka is not a party to the 2004 United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property. Sri Lanka follows the restricted theory of sovereign immunity in terms of which only acts jure imperii (acts of a state in its capacity as a state) would receive immunity. However, it is likely that a separate waiver would be necessary for enforcement measures The Sri Lankan courts have generally followed a strong pro-enforcement approach towards recogni - tion and enforcement of arbitral awards. In particular, the courts have confined refusing enforcement on the ground of public policy to very strict limits. In Light Weight Body Armour Ltd v Sri Lanka Army (2007), the Supreme Court held that not every error of law on the face of the award would amount to a violation of pub - lic policy. The court held that instances such as cor - ruption, bribery, fraud and similar serious cases would be grounds for setting aside an award on this basis. In Atapattu v Janashakthi General Insurance Co Ltd (2013) the Supreme Court reiterated that while public policy was a dynamic concept, it was important to exercise “extreme caution” when applying it. to be taken against a foreign state. 12.3 Approach of the Courts
rules that permits consolidation. 13.5 Binding of Third Parties See 5.6 Jurisdiction Over Third Parties .
807 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook