Once an arbitrator is appointed, parties cannot approach the court for appointment of arbitrator under section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, wherein appointment is made prior to amendment of the Act

Mini Summary: Under the unamended Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, once an arbitrator is appointed and entered into reference, court cannot be approached to appoint another arbitrator under section 11(6) of the Act. Only remedy available to the parties is under section 13 and section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. To view... Continue Reading →

Advertisements

EMERGENCY ARBITRATION: INDIAN PERSPECTIVE

Emergency Arbitration, often described as “Archilles Heel”1 is a procedural innovation in international arbitration to secure the assets and evidence that might otherwise be altered or lost, before the constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal. Whenever a dispute arises, the most important consideration for the parties is: how to obtain an immediate interim relief to preserve... Continue Reading →

Hear It First – Top Litigation Analytics Trends for 2018!

Register for this live 30-minute webcast to introduce our latest research - the 2018 End-of-Year Practice Area Report. The report showcases the 2018 highlights for a variety of practice areas, including: antitrust, bankruptcy, commercial, copyright, Delaware court of chancery, employment, insurance, patent, product liability, PTAB, securities, trademark, and trade secret. During the webcast, you will hear from Lex Machina's Legal... Continue Reading →

“Final Beggary Laws”

POVERTY, CRIMINALITY AND JUSTICE In a landmark judgment passed in “Harsh Mander & Anr. V. Union of India & Ors.”[1], the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi struck down and declared as unconstitutional the provisions of the Bombay Prevention of Begging Act, 1959 that criminalized beggary and made it a punishable offence. This progressive decision is... Continue Reading →

Venue of an arbitration could not be ipso facto considered to be its seat and the place could be equated with seat only if it had no condition precedent attached to it

Mini Summary: The Supreme Court of India was called upon to clear the confusion on the issue that whether the arbitration clause ousted the jurisdiction of Indian Courts in the situation wherein the arbitration agreement had failed to specify the ‘seat’ of an arbitration but does specify a ‘venue’- The Supreme Court has held that... Continue Reading →

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑