Breaking: The Supreme Court today overruled the doctrine laid down in its own year 2002 landmark Bhatia International v Bulk Trading SA & Anr case, which held that Indian courts had exclusive jurisdiction to test the validity of an arbitral award made in India even when the proper law of the contract is the law of another country.
The constitution bench of Chief Justice of India SH Kapadia and justices Jain, Nijjar, Khehar and Desai heard the appeal of Bharat Aluminium Company against Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services – the test case relating to Bhatia International.
The judges held, according to Legally India blogger Courtwitness1, that part 1 of the Arbitration Act does not apply to international arbitration and that the seat of arbitration will determine jurisdiction of the court.
Senior advocate Gopal Subramanium who was acting for Bharat Aluminium had contended the opposite earlier this year. He argued that the seat of arbitration was not the basis on which the jurisdiction of the courts had been defined under the Indian Arbitration Act.
The correct approach to jurisdiction under the Indian Act drew from the principle of party autonomy, the significance of choice of law, English law and from the travaux préparatoires to the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration.
More than 30 counsel including 10 senior advocates had appeared in the various civil appeals and special leave petitions (SLPs) associated with the Supreme Court hearings that started around 10 January. Former Amarchand Mangaldas equity partner Ciccu Mukhopadhaya, who was designated senior counsel in December 2011, was also appearing for the respondents.
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first
it was really weird when because of bhatia international, some LCIA awards were being challenged in India.
some sanity to the sanctity of intl arbitration now!
Former Amarchand Mangaldas equity partner Ciccu Mukhopadhaya who was designated senior counsel in December 2011 was also appearing for the appellants.
Also, news is often self-referential - we've covered this story in the context of Ciccu before, therefore now we are referencing our earlier story (which incidentally also attracted flak for singling him out alongside 20 other counsel).
By the way, please excuse any delays in moderating comments today, Prachi is bedridden and I'm stuck at airports...
Best wishes,
Kian
Side note: For all the hullabaloo about Ciccu, [...]
www.supremecourtofindia.nic.in/outtoday/ac701905p.pdf
paras 198-201
Arbitration award in a foreign country can be challenged in India: SC
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday said an arbitration award arrived at in a foreign country can be challenged in India if it was being enforced here.
The apex court's landmark judgement in the arbitration sector settles a lingering question whether Indian courts had the jurisdiction to entertain challenge to foreign arbitration awards.
timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Arbitration-award-in-a-foreign-country-can-be-challenged-in-India-SC/articleshow/16278240.cms
Link is supremecourtofindia.nic.in/outtoday/ac701905p.pdf
Thanks for bearing with the delay in uploading the judgement. We have now linked to it.
Best wishes,
Prachi
Not really. He and Arathi Rajan instructed the Senior Advocate, Mr.Dholakia, who appeared for LCIA.
Vodafone is an apt example of the havoc retrospective legislation or the threat of retrospective legislation can cause.
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first