Received: 4th March 2024 Revised: 23rd April 2024, 25th April 2024, 2nd May 2024 Accepted: 22nd April 2024


  • Șerban Alexandru Stănescu PhD, Associate Professor at Faculty of Law, University of Bucharest, Director of the International Private Law and International Environmental Law Centre at Faculty of Law, University of Bucharest, Arbitrator for Court of International Commercial Arbitration of the, Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Romania, Lawyer in the Bucharest Bar
  • Ana Maria Dimofte PhD candidate and Assistant professor at the Faculty of Law, University of Bucharest and Paris I - Pantheon Sorbonne, Trainee judge at the Romanian National Institute of Magistracy



Arbitral Award, Nationality, Recognition, Enforcement, New York Convention, International Arbitration


In the case of international disputes resolved by means of arbitration, the cross-border effects of the awards are essential for the parties. At first glance, these awards are assimilated to the national court judgements of the state where they were pronounced and are considered foreign court judgements in any other state. Nevertheless, in some cases, the links between the arbitral procedures and the place of pronouncement of the awards are weak or even non-existent, which raises serios doubts over the ability of this specific place to determine the nationality of the arbitral award. The described circumstance is the premise of the present scientific approach, which aims to deepen the analysis of the criteria for determining the nationality of an arbitral award (by a Romanian court), with implications on its cross-border effects, as well as on the procedures that could lead to its dissolution. From a methodological point of view, the research aims, successively, to inventory the applicable legal instruments, to delineate the solutions offered by them, in order to, finally, by overlapping them, provide a comprehensive theory on the determination of the nationality of an arbitral award.


Van den Berg, A.I. (1981). The New York Arbitration Convention of 1958: Towards a Uniform judicial Interpretation. Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers.

Boroi, G. (2016). Noul Cod de procedură civilă. Comentariu pe articole (2nd ed.). Hamangiu.

Ciobanu, V. M. et al. (2016). Noul Cod de procedură civilă: comentat şi adnotat. Universul Juridic.

Deleanu, I., Deleanu, S. (2005). Arbitrajul intern și internațional. Rosetti.

Fouchard, Ph., Gaillard, E., Goldman, B. (1996). Traité de l’arbitrage commercial international. Litec.

Ionaș-Sălăgean, M. (2001). Arbitrajul comercial. All Beck.

Kroke, H., Nacimiento, P., Otto, D., Port, N.C. (2010). Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards: A Global Commentary on the New York Convention. Kluwer Law International.

Martinez, R. (1990). Recognition and Enforcement of International Arbitral Awards under the United Nations Convention of 1958: the Refusal Provision. Int'l Law, 24(2), 487-518.

Poudret, J., Besson, S. (2007). Comparative law of International Arbitration (2nd ed.). Thomson.

Prescure, P., Crișan, R. (2010). Arbitrajul comercial: modalitate alternativă de soluționare a litigiilor patrimoniale. Universul Juridic.

Roș, V. (2000). Arbitrajul comercial international. R.A. Monitorul Oficial.




How to Cite

Alexandru Stănescu, Șerban, & Maria Dimofte, A. (2024). THE NATIONALITY OF THE ARBITRAL SENTENCE IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION: Received: 4th March 2024 Revised: 23rd April 2024, 25th April 2024, 2nd May 2024 Accepted: 22nd April 2024. PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences, 10(2), 01–07.