In this post, the author discusses the power to modify arbitral awards as developed under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. This is recent development in the Delhi High Court which raises interesting prospects with regards to finality of arbitration and lack of guidance to such modification. The author deals with the question of whether the court has the power under section 34 to modify or remit the award. Lastly, the author attempts to interpret both the sections together to understand whether introducing such power is correct or not. Continue reading Reading in the Forbidden Procedure : Power to Modify Arbitral Orders Through Section 37
In this post, the author highlights how the concept of parallel proceedings is a serious problem in the arbitration for a as it leads to inconsistent arbitral awards by different tribunals adjudicated on the same set of facts. The author critically analyses the application of legal doctrines of Res Judicata and Lis Pendens in parallel investor-state treaty arbitrations. They further explore the problem and discuss how parallel proceedings can be prevented in order to avoid the multiplicity of different awards. Lastly, they provide possible or alternate solutions to the above discussed problem to avoid the cost and multiplicity of proceedings. Continue reading Applicability of Res Judicata and Lis Pendens in the Self-Contained Investor-State Arbitration Regime
In this article, the authors analyse can an interim measure be granted under Section 17 of the A&C Act, 1996 where the liability is seriously disputed? The author analyses in depth the provisions of the same in light of various precedents that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has given in the regard. The author concludes the said research with a recent judgment of the supreme court whereby the Hon’ble Supreme Court answered negative. Continue reading EVERGREEN V JOHN TINSON: ANALYSING SUPREME COURT’S ERRONEOUS RULING ON SECTION 17 OF ARBITRATION ACT
In this post, the authors map the journey of Pakistan in the investment arbitration regime from advocating, promoting, and endorsing to regulating and constraining its purview. The authors suggest that Pakistan’s BIT programme should undergo a systemic shift to promote itself. Continue reading Pakistan and Investment Arbitration: Are they Closer to a Line in the Sand?
In the second part of this series, the author continues to examine how current standards can accommodate future fossil phases out cases. The article ends with an analysis of how the current IIA regime can be re-evaluated to address the climate-investment conflict. Continue reading (BIT)s of Change: An Analysis of the Interaction Between the Climate and International Investment Regimes and Potentials for the Future (Part 2)
With the introduction of a new regulation globally, that is, converting net-zero commitments into concrete policy, a big economic transformation is expected. International investment law, however, does not seem to cope with this new reality as it remains at odds with most of these developments. In the first part of this series, the author explores the conflict between climate and investment law. The author then analyses how current standards can be used in future fossil-fuel phase out cases. Continue reading (BIT)s of Change: An Analysis of The Interaction Between the Climate and International Investment Regimes and Potentials for the Future (Part 1)
In this post, the authors examine the validity of the unilateral appointment of presiding arbitrator by one party-appointed arbitrator through the prisms of party autonomy and equal treatment of parties. They further differentiate the appointment of the presiding arbitrator from that of the sole arbitrator and analyse whether the threshold of procedural equality between the parties is met. Continue reading Presiding Arbitrator’s Appointment by a Co-Arbitrator: Analysis of Confutable Validity