Future-Amazon: Delhi High Court Stays Arbitration Proceedings In Singapore Tribunal Till February 1

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday stayed further arbitration proceedings before the Singapore Tribunal between Amazon and Future Group till February 1. The Court has also stayed the Single Judge order which had dismissed Future Group's plea challenging the two orders passed by the Singapore Arbitration Tribunal. The orders deferred the hearing in the plea filed by Future Group seeking termination of the arbitration proceedings instituted by Amazon. A bench led by Chief Justice DN Patel issued notice on the two appeals filed by Future Retail Ltd. and Future Coupons Pvt. Ltd. impugning the said Single Judge order. The notice has been made returnable on February 1, 2022.The matter was listed pursuant to an urgent mentioning made by Senior Advocate Dayan Krishnan, appearing for Future Group."As an ex parte interim relief, looking at the order passed by statutory authority, CCI dated December 17, 2021, especially para 70, 75, 76, 78, 79 and 80 the approval granted which was kept in abeyance and suppression of material facts by respondent 1, there is a prima facie case made out in the favour of appellants. Moreover, balance of convenience is in favour of appellants," the Court ordered.Adding that all the grounds will be dealt by the Court on February 1, including the maintainability of LPAs, the Court directed "Meanwhile we stay further proceedings of Arbitral Tribunal till the next date of hearing and we also stay order of single judge."Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi appearing for Future Coupons Pvt. Ltd. began his submissions by relying on the order passed by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) which had kept in abeyance the approval granted for Aamzon's deal with Future Group. He argued that if the approval is gone, the agreement automatically loses it's value."This means approval doesn't exist. If it doesn't exist, the agreement has no legal effect in India. The arbitration has not legal effect in India and is a nullity," he added. He argued that the legal effect of the said order was that the agreement had no legal sanctity because of fraud and misleading statements made by Amazon as recorded by the CCI in it's order. "Nobody has filed an appeal. The impact of order is clear. They are not willing to deal it as an preliminary issue. Heaven's are not going to fall. Half of the solicitor's office is down with COVID. So we went to the single bench," he said. Rohatgi further argued that the learned Single Judge in the impugned order failed to appreciate the application and also the fact that the agreement will have no effect after the Commission's order. "The Single Judge says as if the heaven's are falling, that the world has to live with covid. Your lordship the world has to live with covid, But we don't have to live with a situation where justice is denied," he added. Adding to the aforesaid, Harish Salve appearing for Future Retail Ltd. referred to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and argued that while the Arbitral Tribunal is master of it's procedure, the jurisdiction is limited. On the other hand, Senior Advocate Gopal Subramanium appearing for Amazon submitted that it was not fair to say that Tribunal was not taking cognizance of application to terminate. He added that the entire case of the Future Group before the learned Single Judge was on the issue of priority to be given to the termination application. "The matter before Single Judge was only on priority. This is reflected in the order. Incidentally even this approval has not been revoked. It has been kept in abeyance...," he added. "..The Arbitral Tribunal has not relinquished it's duties. Being mindful, it says we will do it. On 8th it will be over. That is a question where we have filed replies. There is no snowballing of those applications in any manner."Defending the single judge order, Subramanium added that the reason why it did not grant any relief to Future Group was because he had seen that the Tribunal had accommodated them. He therefore argued that it was not a fit case to grant any relief under Article 227.Yesterday, Justice Amit Bansal had dismissed the petitions filed by the Future Group. In the pleas, reliance was placed on an order passed by the Competition Commission of India on December 17, 2021, which had kept the approval granted for Amazon's deal with Future Group in abeyance.On receipt of the CCI order, an application was moved before the Singapore Tribunal seeking closure of arbitration proceedings stating that any assertion of contractual rights against Future Group by Amazon would be in direct contravention of the CCI order.Future Group pointed that the schedule that was set down for hearing of the cross-examination of the expert witnesses by the Arbitration Tribunal from 5 to 8 January, 2022, is a complete travesty, averring that the Arbitration Tribunal was informed by the Future Group that during the ongoing proceedings 6 members of its legal team of 12 lawyers attending the case were Covid positive and thus, it ...

Future-Amazon: Delhi High Court Stays Arbitration Proceedings In Singapore Tribunal Till February 1

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags