glass half full

*part of a renewed effort on my part to halt this dangerous loss of passion for and rising abhorrence of all things legal*
I'm reading a judgment on the enforceability of foreign arbitral awards by the United States Court of Appeals 2nd Circuit, and this sentence came to my attention. It can be so stimulating to read something in a judgment that just stands out for how well-written it is, in terms of getting a point across succinctly and powerfully.

Context: an American firm broke a contract with an Egyptian corporation to build and manage a paperboard mill in Alexandria, Egypt following the advent of the 1967 six-day war between the Arabs and Israelis, which precipitated Egypt's expulsion of all Americans and a branch of the State Department cutting off funding for the project. The American firm argued that the arbitral award in favor of the Egyptians should not be recognized as it fell within the public policy exception [to the enforceability of international arbitral awards] in the New York Convention.

And this was what the court had to say:

'To read the public policy defence as a parochial device protective of national political interests would seriously undermine the Convention's utility. This provision was not meant to enshrine the vagaries of international politics under the rubric of "public policy."'

So maybe I'm grasping for straws here but it isn't too often - especially given my current antagonism to the law - that a line stands out to me like this one.

Oh and dare I say, someone should cite the italicized quote to the judges back home sometime (without the term 'international' of course).