UC知道请各位来翻译,仲裁的问题
来源：百度知道 编辑：UC知道 时间：2024/06/21 03:10:09
关于费用担保的一段话
In particular, it would be unacceptable-----and probably contrary to international public policy in many countries-----for security for costs to be ordered on the grounds of the nationality or domicile of one of the parties. That is why the 1996 English Arbitration Act specifically states that the fact that a party has its habitual residence outside the United Kingdom, or is a foreign company or one “whose central management and control is exercised outside the United kingdom” is not a valid ground for security for costs to be ordered. On the other hand, the arbitral tribunal may consider such measures to be justified in some specific situations. The fact that a party is suffering financial difficulties or is the subject of bankruptcy proceedings is certainly not sufficient, in itself, to form the basis of a request for security. However, that may not be the case where a party appears to have deliberately organized its insolvency while commencing what may prove to be le
In particular, it would be unacceptable-----and probably contrary to international public policy in many countries-----for security for costs to be ordered on the grounds of the nationality or domicile of one of the parties. That is why the 1996 English Arbitration Act specifically states that the fact that a party has its habitual residence outside the United Kingdom, or is a foreign company or one “whose central management and control is exercised outside the United kingdom” is not a valid ground for security for costs to be ordered. On the other hand, the arbitral tribunal may consider such measures to be justified in some specific situations. The fact that a party is suffering financial difficulties or is the subject of bankruptcy proceedings is certainly not sufficient, in itself, to form the basis of a request for security. However, that may not be the case where a party appears to have deliberately organized its insolvency while commencing what may prove to be le
尤其, 它会是无法接受的-----和或许相反对许多国家的国际公共政策-----为费用的安全在国籍的理由或者宴会之一的住所上被命令. 哪一是为什么这 1996个英国仲裁行为明确地说事实「一个宴会在英国以外有它的习惯住宅, 或是一家外国的公司」或者一 " 谁的中央管理和控制在英国以外被练习 " 为要命令的费用安全不是有效的地面. 另一方面，仲裁的法官席可能考虑如此的措施在一些特定的情形中被证明. 事实「一个宴会正在蒙受财务的困难」或者是破产进行的主题当然不是充份,本来, 形成对安全的请求基础. 然而，那可能不是一个宴会似乎举行被故意组织的它的无力偿还的情形当可能证明是冗长的开始而且对抗它的共承包商的贵的仲裁进行的时候. 在那一种情形中，仲裁人可能考虑如此的措施在一些特定的情形中被证明. 事实一个宴会正在蒙受财务的困难或者是破产进行的主题当然不是是充份,本来, 形成对安全的请求基础. 然而, 那可能不是情形哪里证明是冗长的而且对抗它的共承包商的贵的仲裁进行. 在那一种情形中，仲裁人可能考虑它必需的, 当做给予保护的尺寸, 命令无力偿还的宴会----- 或者两者的宴会---- 存放必需包括仲裁花费的另一个宴会的偿还的总数, 在事件中在进行结束的时候一个费用的奖赏被做。