As anti-suit injunctions e a Convenção de Nova York: estudo de compatibilidade

• Autor(a) principal: Moura, Bernard Potsch
• Data de Publicação: 2020
• Outros Autores: [e-mail]
• Tipo de documento: Tese
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da UERJ
• Texto Completo: http://www.bdtd.uerj.br/handle/1/18303
• topic: Arbitration; New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards; Arbitragem; Anti-suit injunction; Convenção de Nova York sobre o Reconhecimento e a Execução de Sentenças Arbitrais Estrangeiras; CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO::DIREITO PUBLICO::DIREITO INTERNACIONAL PUBLICO

The present Doctoral Dissertation starts from the hypothesis that anti-suit injunctions – orders issued by courts or arbitrators requiring a person, another court or arbitrator not to start or not to proceed with a different suit – are more and more common in the international legal scenario. It aims to confirm the thesis that, especially when arbitration is involved, these injunctions breach duties and principles arising from the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. Thus, apart from detailing the state of the art concerning anti-suit injunctions, the Dissertation extracts from said Convention a system of distribution of jurisdiction and the principles of comity and mutual trust, concluding that the legal institute in study is incompatible with both. Finally, it breaks apart the analysis to deal with those injunctions allegedly in favor of arbitration, those aiming arbitral proceedings, those issued by arbitrators and those aimed at domestic arbitral proceedings, arguing only the latter deserve a different conclusion as they do not directly impact the New York Convention.