OMAN Law and Practice Contributed by: Sultan Al Ghafri, Nasser Al Riyami, Abdullah Al Aufi and Joud Lashko, Al Khalili, Al Ghailani & Co. LLP (K&Co.)
mental due process, or the award’s being contrary to Omani public policy. An application to annul the award must be filed before the competent Court of Appeal within a limited period from notification of the award, and the grounds available do not extend to a substantive review of the correctness of the tribunal’s factual findings or its application of the law to the mer - its. Where no ground for annulment listed in Article 53 is established, the courts will decline to interfere with the award, and there is no alternative avenue by which a dissatisfied party may otherwise obtain a substan - tive re-hearing of the dispute. 11.2 Excluding/Expanding the Scope of Appeal The grounds on which an award may be annulled under Article 53 of the Arbitration Law are generally treated as an exhaustive statutory list rather than a default regime that the parties are free to expand or narrow by agreement. Omani courts and practitioners have consistently taken the position that alleged evi - dentiary or other defects falling outside this exhaus - tive list cannot be relied upon to set aside an award, even where the parties might otherwise wish to widen the scope of review. Correspondingly, there is limited scope under Omani law for parties to contract out of, or waive in advance, their right to apply for annul - ment on the statutory grounds, given the public policy character of certain of those grounds, in particular the requirement that the award not conflict with Omani public order. Parties seeking a broader or narrower standard of review than that provided by the Arbi - tration Law should therefore be aware that Omani courts are likely to apply the statutory grounds strictly, Consistent with the position on jurisdictional review discussed above, the Omani courts do not conduct a de novo review of the merits of an arbitral award when considering an application for annulment; their role is confined to determining whether one of the exhaus - tive grounds set out in Article 53 of the Arbitration Law is established, such as a defect in the arbitration agreement or the constitution of the tribunal, a failure to observe fundamental procedural guarantees, or a conflict with Omani public policy. This is, in substance, a deferential and narrowly circumscribed standard of regardless of any contrary agreement. 11.3 Standard of Judicial Review
review: the courts will not substitute their own assess - ment of the facts or the correct application of the sub - stantive law for that of the tribunal, and an award will not be annulled merely because the court might have reached a different conclusion on the merits. This approach reflects the general policy of Omani law to treat the arbitral tribunal’s decision on the merits as final and binding, subject only to the limited statutory safeguards.
12. Enforcement of an Award 12.1 New York Convention
Oman acceded to the New York Convention by Royal Decree No. 36/1998, and the Convention has since formed a central part of the framework for the enforce - ment of foreign arbitral awards in the Sultanate, oper - ating alongside the Arbitration Law and the Law of Civil and Commercial Procedure. Oman’s accession did not include reservations that would materially nar - row the scope of the Convention’s application in the manner seen in some other Contracting States. In recent years, the Supreme Court has issued a series of decisions clarifying and, in some respects, stream - lining the practical application of the New York Con - vention framework, including confirming that foreign arbitral awards should generally be enforced through the courts in a manner analogous to domestic awards, reinforcing Oman’s standing as a jurisdiction support - ive of the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbi - tral awards. 12.2 Enforcement Procedure An application for the enforcement of an award seated in Oman is made to the competent court, generally following the deposit of the original award and the arbitration agreement with the court, and is subject to the grounds for refusal set out in Article 53 of the Arbi - tration Law; no application for enforcement is admissi - ble until the period for applying to annul the award has expired. Foreign arbitral awards are enforced under the framework of the New York Convention and the Law of Civil and Commercial Procedure, and recent Supreme Court decisions have confirmed that such awards can generally be enforced through a direct petition process akin to that applicable to domestic awards, rather than requiring a full re-litigation of the underly -
685 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook