A recent judgment of the Delhi High Court is likely to have significant repercussions in the country’s arbitration regime..Justice Manmohan Singh of the Delhi High Court has recently passed a verdict involving Section 12(5) of the amended Arbitration & Conciliation Act of 1996..Hearing a dispute between Assignia-VIL JV and the Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd, the High Court observed that S.12(5) “mandates” that if the arbitrator and the parties involved enjoy any of the relationships mentioned in the Seventh Schedule of the Act, then that arbitrator cannot be appointed. One of these relationships is that of employer-employee, which was the case here..Of course, the provisions of the amended Act only apply to arbitrations that have commenced on or after October 23, 2015. And Section 21 of the Act further clarifies that,.“Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the arbitral proceedings, in respect of a particular dispute commence on the date on which a request for that dispute to be referred to arbitration is received by the respondent.”.Amit George, the counsel for Assignia JV says that the judgment signals the end for “in-house” arbitrators. “This brings Indian law in line with international law and practice,” notes George, “PSU’s will now have to provide for neutral arbitrators.”.The other option of course is to have court-appointed arbitrators. Which was what happened in the present case with former Chief Justice of India, RM Lodha, appointed as arbitrator..Read the judgment below.
A recent judgment of the Delhi High Court is likely to have significant repercussions in the country’s arbitration regime..Justice Manmohan Singh of the Delhi High Court has recently passed a verdict involving Section 12(5) of the amended Arbitration & Conciliation Act of 1996..Hearing a dispute between Assignia-VIL JV and the Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd, the High Court observed that S.12(5) “mandates” that if the arbitrator and the parties involved enjoy any of the relationships mentioned in the Seventh Schedule of the Act, then that arbitrator cannot be appointed. One of these relationships is that of employer-employee, which was the case here..Of course, the provisions of the amended Act only apply to arbitrations that have commenced on or after October 23, 2015. And Section 21 of the Act further clarifies that,.“Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the arbitral proceedings, in respect of a particular dispute commence on the date on which a request for that dispute to be referred to arbitration is received by the respondent.”.Amit George, the counsel for Assignia JV says that the judgment signals the end for “in-house” arbitrators. “This brings Indian law in line with international law and practice,” notes George, “PSU’s will now have to provide for neutral arbitrators.”.The other option of course is to have court-appointed arbitrators. Which was what happened in the present case with former Chief Justice of India, RM Lodha, appointed as arbitrator..Read the judgment below.
