In this post, Archi Jain, Avantika Verma, Mrinal Pandey, and Parimal Kashyap, bring to you our maiden round-up covering the recent developments in the field of arbitration during the first quarter of 2020.
In this blog post, Sahajveer Baweja and Gunjan Singh discuss some potential areas of reforms within CAS in light of the increasing questions over CAS' legitimacy and integrity.
In the second part of the post on seat and venue, Anjali Kumari addresses more recent decisions of the Indian Supreme Court on 'seat' and 'venue'.
In the Part I of this two-part blog post, Anjali Kumari discusses the recent judicial trend concerning the discussion around ‘venue’ and ‘seat’ of an arbitration, in the backdrop of the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Through this blog post, Parth Tyagi addresses tribunal's power to exclude an expert evidence in international arbitration. He argues that despite the absence of any direct source of power, institutional rules indirectly grant a leeway to the tribunal to exclude expert evidence.
The present article traces the origin of the ‘Shashoua Principle’ as devised by the EWHC and its subsequent adoption by the Supreme Court of India. The article addresses the imbroglio situation created in the Supreme Court, wherein a three-judge bench has symbolically overruled a judgment pronounced by another three-judge bench of the same Court.
In the latest post, Aditya Sethi and VS Pravallika analyse the dispute settlement clause of the 2016 Indian Model BIT in the light of recently concluded BIT between India and Brazil.
A lot has been written on Indian courts’ decisions on identifying the seat of an arbitration. However, apart from the slight unavoidable repetition, in this post, Karan Rukhana throws light on the manner in which courts have, to an extent, uniformly employed principles of contract interpretation to find the seat of the arbitration. A joint reading of the recent Supreme Court decisions on the issue and the observations made in BALCO allows to pinpoint the key factors of the arbitration agreement and conduct of parties that weighed with the courts.
In the latest post of our theme based blog series, Vartika Jain identifies the offences proposed to be shifted to in-house adjudication by the Company Law Committee, 2019 and sheds light on the arbitrability of such disputes.
In this article of our theme-based blog posts, Smriti Shukla addresses persisting glitches in the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2019, specifically in the context of Section 29A which lays down a mandatory time limit for an arbitral tribunal to render its award in an India-seated arbitration. This article will attempt to examine the Pandora's Box opened by this Section 29A in the act, with the view that it violates newly incorporated Section 42A of the Act which talks about Confidentiality of the arbitral proceedings.