A remarkable feature of arbitration, making it a preferred dispute settlement mechanism, is the final and binding nature of the arbitral awards. The notion is further set out in the New York Convention, assuring the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards across jurisdictions.1 However, this ‘assured’ enforcement is not absolute in nature as the Convention, in its scheme, allows the national court, where enforcement is sought, to refuse the request. It is often argued, and rightly so, that the success of the New York Convention in a jurisdiction is, inevitably, contingent on its interpretation and application by a national court. Since the Maldives has become the 161st State party to the Convention, as a contracting State, it is essential to comprehend the relevant international obligations under the Convention. In this background, the article identifies the scope of interference with a foreign arbitral award under the Convention. The assessment and discussion include reference to the travaux préparatoires of the Convention and evaluation of the related scholarly work and the judicial discourse, representing international best practices. Finally, the article critically evaluates the arbitration law of the Maldives. It reflects on the relevant material available on the judicial discourse, in light of what the Convention endeavours, before suggesting improvements in accordance with the international best practices.