As an adoption of the Model Law, New Zealand’s Arbitration Act 1996 includes conflict with the public policy of New Zealand as a ground for setting aside and refusing enforcement of awards in domestic and international arbitrations. This article examines the public policy ground under the New Zealand Act. It considers the basis for judicial oversight of awards for conflict with public policy, and reviews the approach taken by the New Zealand courts to both the scope and content of substantive and procedural public policy issues. Notably, the New Zealand cases, by adopting a restrictive approach to public policy, establish a high threshold for review. Some further refinement in approach is justified to reflect international developments on the topic of public policy, and to further support the arbitral process.
Journal of International Arbitration