Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
‘A reference to the document in the contract should be such that shows the intention to incorporate the arbitration clause contained in the document into the contract’
“The notice invoking arbitration sent to the same address was reported to have been delivered, but in the Speed Post report, by which the petition was sent to the address, it is stated that no such person is available at the address.”
The Court noted that, “To attract curial intervention, it must be established that the breach of the rules of natural justice must, at the very least, have actually altered the final outcome of the arbitral proceedings in some meaningful way”.
by Justice Hemant Gupta (Retd.)*
Cite as: 2024 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 28
Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision and emphasised the need for early enforcement of the foreign award by the competent forum.
by Vasanth Rajasekaran* and Harshvardhan Korada**
Cite as: 2024 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 24
Supreme Court concluded that the instant matter was not one of ‘incorporation’ but a case of ‘reference’ and clarified that a general reference would not have the effect of incorporating arbitration clause.
“Prima facie, Respondents 3-5 are a veritable party to the loan agreement as they are connected with the loan documents and form part of the loan transaction.”
DAW 2024 comprises of focused sessions, curated to serve the need for discussion on the most pertinent themes in arbitration today, such as biases in arbitration, joinder of non-signatories in arbitration, Investor State Dispute Settlement mechanisms in light of today’s economic challenges, interplay of technology and arbitration, amongst others.
Supreme Court, while allowing the present petition, appointed Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Former Judge of the Supreme Court of India, to act as the sole arbitrator.
If the part of an Award proposed to be annulled is independent, stands unattached to the other part and can be validly incised, the partial setting aside would be valid and justified. The same also applies to execution proceedings.
Calcutta High Court noted that specific provision under Section 84 of the Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002 mandates arbitration for disputes involving members and the society.
Punjab and Haryana High Court commented that “Such an approach would defeat the intent and objective behind the incorporation of the Act of 1996, which provides for a speedy and efficacious resolution of disputes.”
Supreme Court set aside the Delhi High Court’s decision rejecting IOCL’s plea seeking appointment of an arbitral tribunal to settle claims.
“It is a well-settled law that while deciding the question of appointment of arbitrator, the Court shall not touch the merits of the case as it may cause prejudice to the case of the parties.”
“It needs no re-articulation that one of the cardinal principles of arbitration is, that since arbitration is a remedy that is founded on consent of parties, the agreed procedure for appointment of an arbitrator must be scrupulously followed. However, the same is not done in the present case.”
The Calcutta High Court noted literal interpretation of Section 9 of the Act supports the idea of provisional relief before the final enforcement of the arbitral award under Section 36.
The Calcutta High Court emphasised on the doctrine of “kompetenz-kompetenz”, granting the Arbitral Tribunal the authority to rule on its own jurisdiction, including the existence and validity of the arbitration agreement.
The Calcutta High Court emphasised the need for a clear and unequivocal expression of intent to arbitrate.
2023 was the year of landmark decisions, it kickstarted with Demonetisation verdict; Appointment of Election Commissioners; same sex marriage verdict and went onto settling the tussle between Delhi LG and CM. The mega Maharashtra political crisis was also decided and finally the decision on Abrogation of Article 370 was pronounced.