Monthly Digest Of Arbitration Cases- April 2022

Supreme Court Arbitrators Must Say Upfront Their Fees For The Number Of Sittings, Opines Supreme Court During Hearing Case Title: Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. versus Afcons Gunanusa The Supreme Court, while hearing on the issue of fixation of standards for fees for arbitrators, has emphasized on "upfront" fixation of arbitrator's fee. The Bench of Justices D.Y. Chandrachud, Sanjiv Khanna and Surya Kant was considering the issue regarding the mandatory nature of the 'model' fee scale for arbitrators prescribed under the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996. Absence Of Arbitration Agreement Make Article 137 Of Limitation Act Inapplicable To Arbitration Under Bihar PWCD Arbitration Tribunal Act, 2008: SC Case Title: Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority & Ors. v. Rama Kant Singh The Supreme Court has observed that A. 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 would have no application in arbitration proceedings commenced under Bihar Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act, 2008 (the 2008 Act) when there is no arbitration agreement between the parties. The Division Bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ajay Rastogi also observed that in absence of an arbitration agreement, the Arbitration Act 1996 will also have no application and the reference to the Arbitration Tribunal and the arbitral proceedings will be governed by the 2008 Act. The Court held that the 2008 Act provides for a specific period of limitation, therefore, A. 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 will have no application. However, the Court also observed that since the 2008 Act also allows the Tribunal to condone the delay, the Tribunal is well within its power to admit the reference beyond the period provided under S. 9 of the 2008 Act when sufficient reason for delay was given. Arbitral Tribunal Can't Direct Interim Deposit Of Amount In Dispute When Liability To Pay Is Seriously Disputed: Supreme Court Case Title: Evergreen Land Mark Pvt. Ltd. versus John Tinson and Company Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 389 The Supreme Court has held that the Arbitral Tribunal cannot pass an order by way of interim measure under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to deposit the amount involved in the dispute, in a case where the liability to pay such an amount is seriously disputed and the same is yet to be adjudicated upon by the Tribunal. A Bench comprising of Justices M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna partly allowed an appeal assailing the order of the Delhi High Court, which affirmed the order passed by the Arbitral Tribunal under Section 17 directing the appellant to deposit the entire rental amount even when the liability of the said amount was yet to be considered by it. Group Of Companies Doctrine Can Be Applied To Bind Non Signatory To An Arbitration Agreement: Supreme Court Case Title: Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. versus Discovery Enterprises Pvt. Ltd Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 416 The Supreme Court, in a judgment delivered on 27th April 2022, explained the 'Group of companies' doctrine which postulates that an arbitration agreement entered into by a company within a group of companies, can bind its non-signatory affiliates or sister concerns if the circumstances demonstrate a mutual intention of the parties to bind both the signatory and affiliated, non-signatory parties. The bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud, Surya Kant and Vikram Nath observed that a non-signatory may be bound by the arbitration agreement where: (i) There exists a group of companies; and (ii) Parties have engaged in conduct or made statements indicating an intention to bind a non-signatory.Supreme Court To Examine Conflicting Decisions On Retrospective Impact Of 2015 Amendment To Section 11(6)Arbitration Act Case Title: M/s Shree Vishnu Constructions versus The Engineer in Chief Military Engineering Service The Supreme Court has decided to examine whether Section 11(6) as amended by the Arbitration & Conciliation (Amendment Act), 2015 ("2015 Amendment Act") would be applicable to arbitral proceedings commenced before the Court prior to when the 2015 Amendment came into force on 23.10.2015, or the cases wherein notice was issued prior to 23.10.2015 or cases where notice invoking arbitration was issued prior to the amendments. A Division Bench comprising Justices M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna noted that there were divergent views on this issue. Arbitral Tribunal Can Grant Post Award Interest On Interest Component Included In The Sum Of The Award: Supreme Court Case Title: Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd versus U.B. Engineering Ltd and Anr. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 409 The Supreme Court has held that the arbitral tribunal can grant post-award interest on the sum of the award which also includes the interest component. The Bench comprising Justice M.R. Shah and...

Monthly Digest Of Arbitration Cases- April 2022

ausaf ayyub

Tags