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 can be set aside if the tribunal’s interpretation of the contract is perverse or is not a possible view. (Supreme Court of India)

     Update by Samarth Madan

South East Asia Marine Engineering and Constructions Ltd. (SEAMEC Ltd.) v. Oil India Limited, Court: Supreme Court of India | Case Number: C.A. No. 673/2012 | Citation: 2020 SCC OnLine SC 451| Judges: NV Ramana, Mohan M Shantanagoudar, Ajay Rastogi JJ | Date: 11 May 2020 | Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/108276358/

Continue reading
Categories: Perversity |  Recourse against arbitral award |  Section 34 |  Setting aside arbitral award  

Standard for setting aside arbitral award; permissibility of re-appreciating findings of fact in set-aside proceedings; claim for damages et. al. (Delhi High Court) (7 January 2020)

     Updates by Avantika Verma , Aimen Reshi

G+H Schallschutz  v.  Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited 2020 SCC OnLine Del 19;  single-judge bench, Sanjeev Narula, J.; Decided on 07 January 2020 The Dispute Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (“BHEL”) signed a contract with the Public Electric Company, Yemen to construct a power plant. For manufacture of some equipments required in

Continue reading
Categories: Damages |  Interpretation of contract |  Patent Illegality |  Public policy |  Reappreciation of evidence |  Reappreciation of finding of fact |  Section 34 |  Setting aside arbitral award  

Standard of setting aside; facets of a reasoned award; power of remission et. al. (Supreme Court)

     Updates by Avantika Verma

Dyna Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. Crompton Greaves Ltd., 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1656 Supreme Court of India, 3- Judge Bench, N.V. Ramana, Ajay Rastogi, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, JJ., Decided on 18 December 2019 The Supreme Court has re-emphasised that under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“ACA”) the award must

Continue reading
Categories: Characteristics of a reasoned order |  Characteristics of reasoned order |  Duty to give reasons |  Form and contents of award |  Grounds for setting aside arbitral award |  Implied reasoning |  Perverse award |  Reasoned or speaking award |  Recourse against arbitral award |  Section 34 |  Setting aside arbitral award |  Standard for setting aside arbitral award  

Arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction–Standard of review applied by courts (Bombay High Court)

     Updates by Saurabh Tiwari

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. M3nergy Sdn. Bhd., 2019 SCC OnLine Bom 2915 Bombay High Court; 2-Judge bench; Pradeep Nandrajog, C.J. and Bharati Dangre, J.; decided on 16 October 2019   The question The tribunal may rule on its own jurisdiction if a party raises a plea that the arbitral

Continue reading
Categories: Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal |  Kompetenz-kompetenz |  Recourse against arbitral award |  Setting aside arbitral award