Abstract

This article attempts to refute common stereotypes that would characterize the legal environment in Moldova as unstable and unreliable for recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in national courts. Under analysis is the emerging judicial practice of Moldova's highest court, the Supreme Court of Justice. The author provides a brief introduction to the establishment of continuous support for arbitration in national legislation, international agreements and national judicial practice. Judicial precedents are related to various aspects of recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Moldova: procedures for setting aside; application of the New York Convention; treatment of arbitration clauses by national judges; procedural aspects of commercial arbitration; arbitration under bilateral investment treaties; and other aspects. Several important judgments are discussed in detail, emphasizing the procedural aspects of the enforcement and application by the national courts of international treaties, foreign substantive laws and rules of the administering arbitral institutions. The conclusion drawn on the results of the case law analysis demonstrates that despite common stereotypes supported by certain investment reports and legislation studies, Moldovan courts have always shown general support towards international commercial arbitration as a preferred method of alternative dispute resolution.