Challenging an Award
Strategic Counsel for Setting Aside or Resisting Enforcement of Arbitral Awards
An arbitral award is not always the end of the road. Whether due to procedural irregularities, jurisdictional overreach, or public policy violations, there are legitimate grounds on which an award can be challenged or resisted. Mian Sheraz Javaid (MSJ) offers focused legal strategy for clients seeking to set aside awards or defend against their enforcement in court—especially in complex, cross-border, or high-stakes disputes.
Understanding Award Challenges
Challenging an arbitral award is a high-stakes legal maneuver. Most jurisdictions only allow limited and clearly defined grounds—such as lack of due process, excess of jurisdiction, or serious procedural defects. MSJ helps clients navigate these narrow pathways with precision, ensuring that any challenge or resistance is grounded, credible, and timed for maximum impact.
Common Grounds for Challenge
- Lack of Jurisdiction or Excess of Authority
The tribunal acted beyond the scope of the arbitration agreement. - Serious Procedural Irregularity
A party was denied a fair hearing or fundamental rules of natural justice were breached. - Public Policy Violations
The award is contrary to the public policy of the enforcement or seat jurisdiction. - Invalid Arbitration Agreement
The underlying agreement was void or improperly formed. - Improper Tribunal Constitution
The tribunal was not appointed or composed in accordance with the agreed procedure or institutional rules.
What MSJ Offers
- Strategic Evaluation of Award Weaknesses
A thorough legal and procedural audit of the award to identify viable challenge grounds and jurisdictional strategy. - Set-Aside Proceedings Before National Courts
Drafting and filing applications to annul or set aside awards before competent courts at the seat of arbitration. - Resisting Enforcement in Foreign Jurisdictions
Defending against recognition and enforcement actions under the New York Convention or national enforcement laws. - Parallel Negotiation Support
Using challenge proceedings as leverage to achieve more favorable commercial settlements post-award. - Coordination with Local Counsel
Leading strategy and working closely with enforcement counsel across jurisdictions to ensure procedural compliance and case alignment.
Why It Matters
- The Window Is Narrow: Most jurisdictions impose strict timelines (30–90 days) to challenge an award—swift action is essential.
- Procedural Nuance is Critical: Courts evaluate challenges with precision; missteps or weak arguments can cost credibility and finality.
- Commercial Leverage: Even a credible challenge can shift bargaining power during enforcement or post-award negotiations.
- Reputation & Precedent: High-stakes awards often carry reputational or operational consequences—strategic challenges can help preserve position.
Engage with MSJ
as Counsel
Share your matter. Let the Master Strategist lead.
Your case demands more than a litigator?
It requires a legal mind that thinks in outcomes?
You'll hear from us within 1-2 business days.