THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO DETERMINING THE LIMITS OF VERIFICATION BY STATE COURTS OF ARBITRAL AWARDS

The purpose of the work is to analyze theoretical approaches to determining the limits of verification by state courts of arbitral awards. Each state shall establish its own grounds for the cancellation of arbitral awards, as well as for the refusal to recognize and enforce the arbitral award. This is a prerequisite for different approaches to determining the limits of judicial control over arbitral awards. In this regard, it is of particular relevance to study the limits of state control over the decisions of arbitration courts, given the differences in approaches in different jurisdictions to this issue. The author examines doctrinal sources in the field of arbitration and identifies the following models of judicial control: a model of broad control, in which the decision is checked on the merits (for the correctness of the application of both substantive and procedural law); a model of limited control, in which the arbitral award is checked for the presence of the arbitral tribunal competence and significant procedural violations  committed during the consideration of the dispute; the absence of any judicial review. These models of judicial control clearly show the degree of state interference in the activities of arbitration courts