45(1) Each signatory agrees to apply this Treaty provisionally pending its entry into force for such signatory in accordance with Article 44, to the extent that such provisional application is not inconsistent with its constitution, laws or regulations.
a. Australia: TCL Air Conditioner (Zhongshan) Co. Ltd. v. Judges of the Federal Court of Australia, (2013) 295 ALR 596 (H.C.A.): "arbitrators cannot by their own decision … create or extend the authority conferred upon them" (at para. 12);
b. Australia: IMC Aviation Solutions Pty Ltd. v. Altain Khuder LLC (2011) 282 ALR 717 (V.C.A.): court reviewed expert opinions and affidavits and made own determination of applicable Mongolian law (at paras. 113 – 117);
c. New Zealand: Downer Construction (New Zealand) Limited v. Silverfield Developments Limited, (2004) CIV 2004-404-4488 (H.C. Auk.): "the proper approach [to an application under art. 16(3)] is to reconsider the issue of jurisdiction de novo since the proceeding is not by way of appeal, and since the issue before me is the threshold issue of jurisdiction" (at para. 56);
d. Ireland: J ohn G. Burns Limited v. Grange Construction & Roofing Company Limited,  IEHC 284 (H.C.): "the Court has untrammeled jurisdiction to consider de novo the issue whether there is an arbitration agreement which binds the parties" (para. 24).
e. Hong Kong: S Co. v. B Co.,  6 HKCFI 1436: "whether the application is made under Article 16(3) or the relevant paragraphs of Article 34, the court's review of the Tribunal's decision on its jurisdiction should be de novo – in the sense that the court must be satisfied that the Tribunal was correct and that it did have jurisdiction" (at para. 50).