Polly Pope
Polly is a leading New Zealand commercial barrister. Her practice spans construction, insolvency, class action, property, company and commercial disputes.
She is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (UK) and of the Arbitrators and Mediators Institute of New Zealand, a recipient of the Sir Ronald Davison Award for excellence in arbitral award writing, and a member of AMINZ's Arbitration Appeals Tribunal.
Practice Area
Panel
- Contributing Author
Qualified Year
- 1999
Experience
- Clifford Chance LLP (2005 - 2009)
- Russell McVeagh (2003 - 2005)
- Debevoise & Plimpton (2001 - 2003)
- Russell McVeagh (1991 - 2001)
Membership
- Fellow, Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (UK)
- Fellow, Arbitrator's and Mediator's Institute of New Zealand
- Member, Society for Construction Law
- Member, Restructuring, Insolvency and Turnaround Association of New Zealand
Qualifications
- LLB (Hons – first class) (1998)
- Master of International Relations (with distinction) (2001)
Education
- University of Otago (1998)
- Victoria University of Wellington (2001)
5 Contributions by Polly Pope
PRACTICE NOTES
Arbitration in New Zealand: Key Provisions of the Arbitration Act 1996 on Agreements, Tribunal Powers, Schedule 2 Appeals, Confidentiality, Interim Measures, Stays, Evidence and Award Challenges
This Practice Note ought to be read alongside Practice Note: Arbitration in New Zealand—recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards.
The New Zealand Arbitration Act 1996
The Arbitration Act 1996 (the Act) prescribes the framework governing domestic and international arbitrations in New Zealand. Any references in this Practice Note to sections, Sch 1 and its articles, and Sch 2 and its clauses, are references to the Act.
The Act’s aims are to foster the use of arbitration at home and abroad, to secure coherence across international arbitral regimes and between those regimes and New Zealand’s domestic scheme, to uphold party autonomy in resolving disputes by arbitration, and to confine the oversight of New Zealand courts when asked to review or set aside arbitral outcomes.
To meet these objectives, Schedule 1 establishes a unified set of rules for both international and domestic arbitrations. This scheme is derived from the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (the Model Law). As outlined more fully in this Practice Note, certain modifications have been introduced to adapt, amend or supplement the Model Law’s provisions for their operation in New Zealand. Further particulars are set out in this Practice Note wherever relevant and necessary for clarity...
Arbitration
PRACTICE NOTES
Interim measures in New Zealand arbitration: tribunal and court powers, tests, freezing orders, security for costs, without notice and emergency arbitrator orders
Interim remedies in support of arbitration—the legislative regime
Arbitration in New Zealand is regulated by the Arbitration Act 1996 (the Act). The principal body of the Act sets out general provisions and rules applicable. Schedule 1 contains an adapted form of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law (the Model Law), and Schedule 2 sets out special rules that generally apply only to domestic arbitrations. In 2007, New Zealand was the first country in the world to implement amendments to the original Model Law put forward by the UNCITRAL 2000 working group, delivering a more comprehensive code for interim measures in support of arbitration. This New Zealand regime is located, in particular, in articles 9 and 17–17M of Schedule 1 to the Act:
article 9 of the Act provides for court-ordered interim measures in support of arbitration; and
articles 17–17M of the Act concern the making of interim measures orders by arbitral tribunals
Provision for awards and orders by emergency arbitrators also now forms part of New Zealand law. A 2017 amendment to the Act provides that the definition of ‘arbitral tribunal’ under the Act expressly includes any emergency arbitrator appointed under either the...
Arbitration
PRACTICE NOTES
New Zealand arbitration: stays of proceedings, anti-suit injunctions, and challenges to tribunal jurisdiction—grounds and High Court procedure
A central element in giving effect to an agreement to arbitrate is safeguarding the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal seized of the dispute. In New Zealand, a range of remedies exists to protect the tribunal’s exclusive authority from both domestic and overseas court proceedings. In addition, parties have avenues to address situations where the arbitral tribunal has been improperly seized of jurisdiction...
Accordingly, this Practice Note considers the following issues:
applying for a stay of court proceedings in favour of arbitration
applying for injunctions in the New Zealand courts to restrain foreign court proceedings brought in breach of an arbitration agreement (the ‘anti-suit’ injunction)
challenging the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal in New Zealand
Both international and domestic arbitration in New Zealand is governed by the Arbitration Act 1996. The Arbitration Act largely implements the UNCITRAL Model Law as Schedule 1 to the Act. Additional optional procedural rules are supplied under Schedule 2, which apply to all domestic arbitrations unless the parties agree otherwise (and only apply to an international arbitration if the parties so agree)...
Arbitration
PRACTICE NOTES
New Zealand state immunity in arbitration: restrictive doctrine, tribunal jurisdiction, court recognition and enforcement, and ICSID award recognition versus execution immunity
This Practice Note surveys New Zealand’s law on state immunity in general terms before moving to the two scenarios noted above. For an overview of arbitration in New Zealand, see Arbitration in New Zealand—an introduction. For approaches to challenging the jurisdiction of arbitration awards more broadly, see Practice Note: Challenging jurisdiction and anti-suit provisions in New Zealand.
State immunity can be pertinent to arbitration in two ways:
a challenge to the arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction grounded in state immunity, or
a challenge to enforcement of the arbitration award relying on state immunity
The application of state immunity to investment arbitration awards under the Arbitration (International Investment Disputes) Act 1979 is addressed separately below.
Note: New Zealand judgments below are not reported by LexisNexis®.
State immunity in New Zealand: generally
A state named as a defendant may dispute the court’s jurisdiction by invoking state immunity. The doctrine rests on comity and international law, because the assertion of national court jurisdiction over a state is regarded as incompatible with the dignity and independence of the international state (Governor of Pitcairn and Associated Islands v Sutton [1995] 1 NZLR 426 (CA))...
Arbitration
PRACTICE NOTES
Recognition and enforcement of domestic and foreign arbitral awards in New Zealand: procedure, courts, documentation, defences (Art 36), emergency arbitrators, and the courts’ pro-enforcement approach
Recognition and enforcement of both New Zealand and foreign arbitral awards in New Zealand
In New Zealand, the recognition and enforcement of domestic and overseas arbitral awards is governed by the Arbitration Act 1996 (the Act), Sch 1, arts 35 and 36. Those provisions effectively incorporate the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (the New York Convention) into New Zealand law. Under this framework, a New Zealand court must treat an arbitral award as binding, regardless of the country in which it was made. As a result, awards issued abroad are recognised and can be enforced in New Zealand. Recognition of a foreign award follows automatically from art 35 and does not require the award to be entered as a judgment of the New Zealand court. Therefore, where a party seeks to defend fresh proceedings by relying on a cause of action or issue estoppel arising from an earlier arbitral award, it may simply plead recognition of that award in the new proceedings...
Arbitration
If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.
