Arbitrator Cannot Apply 'Trade Usages' Against The Express Understanding Of The Parties: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has held that the arbitrator cannot, while adjudicating the dispute between the parties, apply trade usages against the express intention of the terms of the agreement between the parties. It held that by virtue of Section 28(3) of the A&C Act, an arbitrator can apply trade usages to determine the dispute between the parties, however, the same cannot...

Circumstances Mentioned Under Schedules V Do Not Per Se Render The Arbitrator Ineligible: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that unlike Schedule VII, the circumstances mentioned under the Vth Schedule do not per se render an arbitrator ineligible to be appointed as arbitrator unless it is established that the arbitrator's neutrality was indeed compromised. The bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri held that merely because an Arbitrator has been appointed in more than two...

When Financial Institution Is A 'Borrower' It Can't Invoke Arbitration Under Section 11 Of SARFAESI Act: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that a borrower which also happens to be a financial institution cannot resort to arbitration provided under Section 11 of SARFAESI Act. The bench of Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani held that Section 11 of SARFAESI Act provides for remedy by way of arbitration only in cases of inter se dispute between the financial institution but does not cover a...

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up: 30 October To 5 November, 2022

Supreme Court: Issue Of Arbitrability Should Be Left To Arbitrator Unless On The Face It Is Found That Dispute Is Non- Arbitrable: Supreme Court Case Title: VGP Marine Kingdom Pvt Ltd versus Kay Ellen Arnold The Supreme Court reiterated that while considering application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the dispute with respect to the arbitrability...

Arbitration Agreement "Exists" Only When It Is Enforceable In Law And Meets The Statutory Requirements Of A&C Act And Contract Act: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that a mere exchange of communication is not sufficient to show that the parties are at ad idem with respect to an arbitration agreement, when none of the correspondence exchanged between the parties made any reference to an agreement containing an arbitration clause. The Single bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao observed that the petitioner had failed to...

Issue Of Arbitrability Should Be Left To Arbitrator Unless On The Face It Is Found That Dispute Is Non- Arbitrable: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court reiterated that while considering application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the dispute with respect to the arbitrability should be left to the arbitrator, unless on the face it is found that the dispute is not arbitrable.In this case, the Madras High Court dismissed an application to appoint an arbitrator on the ground...

Arbitration, Invoked Without Authority, The Defect Can't Be Ratified With Fresh Board Resolution: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has ruled that the issue whether the arbitration was invoked and the Statement of Claim was filed, by a person duly authorized by the claimant, goes to the root of the matter, with respect to which the arbitral tribunal may make a final arbitral award. Thus, the Court held that the order passed by the arbitral tribunal, granting a choice to the claimant to prove...

Application For Appointment Of Arbitrator Can't Be Rejected Due To Vague Notice Invoking Arbitration: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court has ruled that the contention that the notice issued under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act), invoking the arbitration clause, is vague or bereft of material particulars, cannot be a ground to reject the application under Section 11(6) of the A&C Act, seeking appointment of an arbitrator.The Single Bench of Chief Justice...

Section 34 Of The A&C Act Application Pending For 13 Years, MP HC Directs District Courts To Decide All Petitions Within 1 Year

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has expressed strong displeasure for keeping a petition under Section 34 of A&C Act pending for 13 years .The bench of Justice Subodh Abhaynkar remarked that delay in deciding arbitration applications mocks at and frustrates the very object for which the Act was promulgated. The Court directed the all the district Court to decide all the petitions...

Death Of One Of The Arbitrators - But Decided To Pass Award Prior To Death - Not Contrary To Section 10 Of A&C Act: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court has ruled that if an Arbitral Tribunal had principally decided to pass the award on a day when all the members of the Arbitral Tribunal were present, merely because the detailed award was passed on the day when one of the members of the Arbitral Tribunal was not alive, and was thus signed by only two members, it cannot be said that the award was contrary to...

Arbitration Cases Monthly Round-Up: October 2022

Supreme Court: Arbitral Tribunal Must Give Reasons For Fixing Interest Rate; Award Holder Not Entitled To Interest For Delay Caused By It : Supreme Court Case Title: Executive Engineer (R and B) versus Gokul Chandra Kanungo The Supreme Court recently held that a case where the award holder was responsible for delaying the proceedings which led to a huge lapse of time would be a...

A Party Cannot Be Made To Nominate Its Arbitrator From A Narrow Panel Of 4 Arbitrators Consisting Of Retired Officers Of The Other Party: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that a panel of arbitrator with only four names to choose from does not satisfy the concept of neutrality of arbitrators. It held that a narrow panel comprising of retired employees of a party creates a reasonable apprehension of bias and partiality. The bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna held that the contractor cannot be made to choose its...