Existence and validity and of an arbitration agreement, and arbitrability of the dispute can be examined in proceedings under Section 8 and Section 11 ACA. The court should interfere in limited cases where it is plainly arguable that the arbitration agreement is non-existent, invalid or the disputes non-arbitrable. (Supreme Court)

     Update by Editor

Vidya Drolia and others v. Durga Trading Corporation (Vidya Drolia II) Court: Supreme Court of India | Case Number: Civil Appeal No. 2402 of 2019 | Citation: 2020 SCC OnLine SC 1018 | Bench: NV Ramana, Sanjiv Khanna and Krishna Murari JJ | Date of decision: 14 December 2020 |

Continue reading
Categories: Appointment of arbitrator |  Arbitrability |  Boghara Polyfab principle |  Booz Allen principle |  Competence Competence |  Erga omnes effect |  Existence of arbitration agreement |  Formal validity of arbitration agreements |  In personam |  In rem |  Nonarbitrability |  Power to refer parties to arbitration |  Public policy |  Section 11 |  Section 16 |  Section 8 |  Substantive validity |  Test of arbitrability |  Validity  

Clause restricting choice of one party to select the sole arbitrator from a panel of three names is okay. Voestalpine (2-judge bench SC) cannot be relied on because of CORE (3-judge bench SC). Passages in Voestalpine about broad-based panel were merely suggestions (Delhi High Court)

     Update by Editor

Iworld Business Solutions Private Limited v. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Limited Court: Delhi High Court| Case number: OMP (T) Comm. 71 of 2020 | Citation: Not available currently |Bench: C Hari Shankar J | Date: 04 December 2020 Applying the decision of the Supreme Court in CORE (cited below), a

Continue reading
Categories: Fifth Schedule |  Independence and Impartiality of arbitrator |  Section 11 |  Section 12 |  Seventh Schedule |  The Perkins principle |  The TRF principle |  The Voestalpine principle  

Is dismissal of a set-aside petition on limitation appealable? Though answering no, the Delhi High Court granted a certificate for appeal to the Supreme Court.

     Update by Editor

Chintels India Limited v. Bhayana Builders Pvt. Ltd.   Court: Delhi High Court| Case number: FAO (OS) Comm. No. 68 of 2020 | Citation: Not available currently |Bench: Rajiv Sahai Endlaw and Asha Menon JJ | Date: 04 December 2020    Is an order dismissing a set-aside petition filed under

Continue reading
Categories: Application for setting aside award |  Article 134 |  Certificate for appeal |  Condonation of delay |  Section 34 |  Section 34(3) |  Section 37 |  Sufficient cause  

Choice of foreign law (laws of UK) by two Indian parties as the law governing the main contract is enforceable because a foreign element (high seas sale) was involved in the transaction (Delhi High Court)

     Update by Editor

Dholi Spintex Pvt. Limited v. Louis Dreyfus Company India Pvt. Ltd. Court: Delhi High Court| Case number: CS (Comm.) 286 of 2020 | Citation: Not available currently |Bench: Mukta Gupta J | Date: 24 November 2020      A. The Context The concept of freedom of contract is well recognized.

Continue reading
Categories: Arbitral seat |  Choice of law |  Foreign law |  Party autonomy |  Power of judicial authority to refer parties to arbitration |  Section 45  

Indian parties can arbitrate in a foreign seat. The resultant award would be a foreign award enforceable under Part II of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Gujarat High Court)

     Update by Editor

GE Power Conversion India Pvt. Ltd. v. PASL Wind Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Court: Gujarat High Court| Case number: Petition under Arbitration Act No. 131 and 134 of 2019 | Citation: Not available currently |Bench: Viren Vaishnav J | Date: 03 November 2020    A. The ruling summarised The definition of

Continue reading
Categories: Arbitral seat |  Seat |  Section 44 |  Section 48 |  Section 9  

  Older Posts