An award can be set aside if it shocks the conscience of the court. (Bombay High Court)

     Update by Shruti Mishra

Jackie Kukubhai Shroff v. Ratnam Sudesh Iyer Court: Bombay High Court | Case Number: ARB.P. 167/2015 | Citation: Currently not available| Judge: SC Gupte  J| Date: 19 May 2020 | Available at: https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/pdf_upload-375326.pdf    A. THE BACKGROUND Jackie and Ratnam were shareholders in Atlas. Atlas was a shareholder in MSM. Dispute arose concerning the sale

Continue reading
Categories: Agent |  Fundamental policy of Indian law |  Liquidated damages |  Most basic notions of morality and justice |  Patent Illegality |  Public Policy of India |  Section 34 |  Setting aside arbitral award  

An award based on put-option in a contract does not violate the public policy of India (Bombay High Court)

     Update by Editor

Banyan Tree Growth Capital LLC v. Axiom Cordages Limited and others, Commercial Arbitration Petition No. 476 of 2019 Bombay High Court| single-judge bench | GS Kulkarni J | 30 April 2020 Banyan, a Mauritius based fund, invested USD fifty million into Axiom Cordages Limited after negotiations with Axion’s promoters. The

Continue reading
Categories: Fundamental policy of Indian law |  Public policy |  Public Policy of India |  Section 34  

Foreign award cannot be enforced if the matter involves violation of export-restrictions (Supreme Court of India)

     Update by Samarth Madan , Case Comment by Prashant Mishra

National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India v. Alimenta S.A., 2020 SCC OnLine SC 381 Supreme Court of India; 3-judge bench, Arun Mishra, MR Shah, BR Gavai JJ; decided on 22 April 2020   On 22 April 2020A 3-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India ruled on the enforceability

Continue reading
Categories: Conditions for enforcement of foreign awards |  Enforcement  |  Enforcement of foreign awards |  Foreign Awards (Recognition and Enforcement) Act |  Fundamental policy of Indian law |  Public policy |  Public Policy of India  

Considering and allowing a time-barred claim makes the award contrary to public policy of India, and irrational, and perverse, and lacking in judicial approach

     Updates by Saurabh Tiwari

KM Suresh Babu v. Sundaram Finance Limited Madras High Court; single-judge bench, M Sundar J; 05 March 2020 A. THE BACKGROUND Sundaram Finance (SF) financed a truck to Suresh under a hire-purchase contract. Suresh defaulted on the repayment of instalments on 06 April 1999. SF seized the truck on 17

Continue reading
Categories: Fundamental policy of Indian law |  Limitation |  Patent Illegality |  Public Policy of India |  Section 34  

Award set aside by Delhi High Court in an appeal, overturning the finding of the arbitral tribunal and a single judge who had dismissed the set-aside application, on the ground that the reasoning of the tribunal was perverse and hence in conflict with the public policy of India (Delhi High Court)

     Updates by Avantika Verma

MMTC Limited v. Anglo American Metallurgical Coal, FAO (OS) 532/2015 Delhi High Court; 2-judge bench, G.S. Sistani and Anup Jairam Bhambhani JJ.; decided on 02 March 2020 A bench of two judges of the Delhi High Court set aside, in this case, a domestic award in an appeal under Section

Continue reading
Categories: Application for setting aside award |  Fundamental policy of Indian law |  Perverse award |  Public Policy of India |  Recourse against arbitral award |  Section 34