ARTICLE
7 October 2015

Imminent Amendments To The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996

SC
Solomon & Co.

Contributor

Solomon & Co. is a full-service law firm headquartered in Mumbai, the financial and commercial capital of India, with offices in Mumbai and Pune. Founded in 1909, the firm is ranked amongst the most reputed law firms in the country.

The firm provides high-value legal services across a broad range of practice areas, including Corporate, Mergers and Acquisitions, Business and Trade, Banking and Finance, Capital Markets, India entry, Private Equity, Dispute Resolution, Real Estate and Construction, Insurance and Intellectual Property. Since its inception, Solomon & Co. has been advising Indian and international companies, government organizations and individuals on their most challenging transactions. Our clients range from global banks, investment funds and high net-worth individuals to not-for-profit organizations. Solomon & Co. is a member of Alliott Global Alliance in Mumbai, Pune and Goa.

The Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Bill, 2015 is one of the bills listed for introduction during the current Parliamentary Budget Session between 23 February and 8 May 2015.
India Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration

The Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Bill, 2015 is one of the bills listed for introduction during the current Parliamentary Budget Session between 23 February and 8 May 2015. The bill is expected to contain proposals for reform which are in line with those contained in the report submitted by the Law Commission of India in August 2014, for example:

  • Restrictions to the scope of the term "public policy", in order to reduce challenges to arbitral awards on the ground that they are in conflict with the public policy of India.
  • Clarification that patent illegality on the face of an award should be a ground for setting it aside; awards should not be set aside only on the grounds of erroneous application of the law or re-appreciation of the evidence.
  • Courts to dispose of applications made under Section 34 (Application for setting aside arbitral award) and 48 (Conditions for enforcement of foreign awards) within one year of the application being filed.
  • In situations where parties are unable to decide upon an arbitrator, parties to approach the High Court or the Supreme Court under Section 11 of the Act (and not the Chief Justice, which is currently the case) to appoint an arbitrator on their behalf. Courts to dispose of such applications within 60 days.
  • Court's powers under Section 11 (Appointment of arbitrators) to be limited to examining the existence of an arbitration agreement and not considering the merits of the dispute.

The proposals are also expected to address difficulties created by the Indian Supreme Court judgment in the Bharat Aluminium case (see our previous newsletter on this case), by allowing parties to expressly agree that a party to a foreign seated arbitration may apply to an Indian court for interim measures of protection (like obtaining security or an injunction or for assistance in taking evidence) under Section 9 of the Act, even though this section is no longer applicable to foreign seated arbitrations.

Originally published in March 2015 Newsletter.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More