Arbitration Law

Supreme Court Clarifies Applicability of Arbitration Acts in Bihar Works Contracts: State of Bihar vs. Brahmaputra Infrastructure Ltd. (2018)

/ Adarsh Kumar Goel, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 8, Bihar Public Works Contracts Arbitration Tribunal Act, 2008, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Judges, Rohinton Fali Nariman, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Clarifies Applicability of Arbitration Acts in Bihar Works Contracts: State of Bihar vs. Brahmaputra Infrastructure Ltd. (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Applicability of the Central Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 versus the Bihar Public Works Contracts Arbitration Tribunal Act, 2008 in cases where an arbitration agreement exists. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: The State […]

Supreme Court Clarifies Applicability of Arbitration Acts in Bihar Works Contracts: State of Bihar vs. Brahmaputra Infrastructure Ltd. (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies jurisdiction objections in arbitration: Lion Engineering Consultants vs. State of M.P. (2018)

/ Adarsh Kumar Goel, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 16, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 227, Judges, Jurisdiction in Arbitration, Rohinton Fali Nariman

Supreme Court clarifies jurisdiction objections in arbitration: Lion Engineering Consultants vs. State of M.P. (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a plea of jurisdiction can be raised under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, even if not raised under Section 16 of the same Act. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: M/S Lion Engineering

Supreme Court clarifies jurisdiction objections in arbitration: Lion Engineering Consultants vs. State of M.P. (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies jurisdiction in Arbitration Cases: Lion Engineering Consultants vs. State of M.P. (22 March 2018)

/ Adarsh Kumar Goel, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 16, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 227, Judges, Rohinton Fali Nariman, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction in Arbitration Cases: Lion Engineering Consultants vs. State of M.P. (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an objection to jurisdiction can be raised under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, even if not raised earlier under Section 16 of the same Act. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: M/S Lion

Supreme Court clarifies jurisdiction in Arbitration Cases: Lion Engineering Consultants vs. State of M.P. (22 March 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Applicability of 2015 Amendment Act to Arbitration Proceedings: BCCI vs. Kochi Cricket (2018) INSC 227

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 36, Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, General Clauses Act, 1897, General Clauses Act, 1897 with Section 6, Judges, Navin Sinha, R.F. Nariman

Supreme Court Clarifies Applicability of 2015 Amendment Act to Arbitration Proceedings: BCCI vs. Kochi Cricket (2018) INSC 227 LEGAL ISSUE: Applicability of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015 to pending arbitral and court proceedings. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Board of Control for Cricket in India vs. Kochi Cricket Pvt. Ltd. and Others

Supreme Court Clarifies Applicability of 2015 Amendment Act to Arbitration Proceedings: BCCI vs. Kochi Cricket (2018) INSC 227 Read Post »

Supreme Court restricts practice of foreign law firms in India: Bar Council of India vs. A.K. Balaji (2018)

/ Adarsh Kumar Goel, Advocates Act, 1961, Advocates Act, 1961 with Section 29, Advocates Act, 1961 with Section 33, Advocates Act, 1961 with Section 47, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 48, International Commercial Arbitration, Judges, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Restricts Foreign Law Firms’ Practice in India: Bar Council of India vs. A.K. Balaji (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether foreign law firms and lawyers are permitted to practice law in India. CASE TYPE: Regulatory/Advocacy Case Name: Bar Council of India vs. A.K. Balaji and Ors. Judgment Date: March 13, 2018 Date of the Judgment:

Supreme Court restricts practice of foreign law firms in India: Bar Council of India vs. A.K. Balaji (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies payment appropriation in contract dispute: Kerala State Electricity Board vs. Kurien E. Kalathil (2018)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 7, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 89, Breach of contract, Code of Civil Procedure, Code of Civil Procedure with Order XXI Rule 1, Code of Civil Procedure with Section 34, Contract Act, Contract Act with Clause E1.079, Judges, R. Banumathi, Ranjan Gogoi

Supreme Court clarifies payment appropriation in contract dispute: Kerala State Electricity Board vs. Kurien E. Kalathil (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Contractual payment appropriation and interest calculation CASE TYPE: Contract/Civil Case Name: Kerala State Electricity Board and Anr. vs. Kurien E. Kalathil and Anr. [Judgment Date]: 9 March 2018 Date of the Judgment: 9 March 2018 Citation:

Supreme Court clarifies payment appropriation in contract dispute: Kerala State Electricity Board vs. Kurien E. Kalathil (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies incorporation of arbitration clauses by reference in construction contracts: Elite Engineering vs. Techtrans Construction (23 February 2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Arbitration Agreement, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 7, Ashok Bhushan, Construction Contracts, Contract Law, Incorporation by reference, Interpretation of Contracts, Judges

Supreme Court clarifies incorporation of arbitration clauses by reference: Elite Engineering vs. Techtrans Construction (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an arbitration clause from a main contract can be incorporated into a sub-contract by reference. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: M/S. Elite Engineering and Construction (Hyd.) Private Limited vs. M/S. Techtrans Construction India Private Limited Judgment

Supreme Court clarifies incorporation of arbitration clauses by reference in construction contracts: Elite Engineering vs. Techtrans Construction (23 February 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds SARFAESI Act Invocation by Successor-in-Interest in Indiabulls Housing Finance vs. Deccan Chronicle Holdings (2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 9, Ashok Bhushan, Judges, SARFAESI Act, 2002, SARFAESI Act, 2002 with Section 13(2), SARFAESI Act, 2002 with Section 2(1)(f), SARFAESI Act, 2002 with Section 35

Supreme Court Upholds SARFAESI Act Invocation by Successor-in-Interest in Indiabulls Housing Finance vs. Deccan Chronicle Holdings (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a successor-in-interest, like Indiabulls Housing Finance Limited, can invoke the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) when the original lender, Indiabulls Financial Services Limited (IBFSL), was

Supreme Court Upholds SARFAESI Act Invocation by Successor-in-Interest in Indiabulls Housing Finance vs. Deccan Chronicle Holdings (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies price adjustment formula in highway contracts: National Highway Authority of India vs. M/S. ProgressiveMVR (JV) (23 February 2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Arbitration, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration with Section 34, Ashok Bhushan, Contract Law, Interpretation of Contracts, Judges, Price Adjustment Clause

Supreme Court Clarifies Price Adjustment Formula in Highway Contracts Date of the Judgment: 23 February 2018 Citation: Civil Appeal No. 458 of 2018 Judges: A.K. Sikri, J., Ashok Bhushan, J. Can a contractual clause be interpreted in a way that leads to unrealistic price adjustments? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question in

Supreme Court clarifies price adjustment formula in highway contracts: National Highway Authority of India vs. M/S. ProgressiveMVR (JV) (23 February 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds No-Claim Certificate in Construction Dispute: ONGC Mangalore Petrochemicals Ltd. vs. ANS Constructions Ltd. (7 February 2018)

/ Amitava Roy, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Proceedings, Construction Contract Disputes, Contract Law, Contract Law with Accord and Satisfaction, Contractual Obligations, Judges, R.K. Agrawal

Supreme Court Upholds No-Claim Certificate in Construction Dispute: ONGC Mangalore Petrochemicals Ltd. vs. ANS Constructions Ltd. (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a ‘No Dues Certificate’ issued by a contractor can be invalidated on grounds of duress or coercion, allowing for arbitration of subsequent claims. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: M/s ONGC Mangalore Petrochemicals Ltd. vs.

Supreme Court Upholds No-Claim Certificate in Construction Dispute: ONGC Mangalore Petrochemicals Ltd. vs. ANS Constructions Ltd. (7 February 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies appealability of foreign award enforcement under Arbitration Act and Commercial Courts Act (7 February 2018)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 50, Commercial Courts Act, 2015, Commercial Courts Act, 2015 with Section 13, Foreign Awards, Judges, Navin Sinha, Rohinton Fali Nariman

Supreme Court Clarifies Appealability of Foreign Award Enforcement Under Arbitration Act and Commercial Courts Act LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an appeal, not maintainable under Section 50 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is maintainable under Section 13(1) of the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015. CASE TYPE: Arbitration

Supreme Court clarifies appealability of foreign award enforcement under Arbitration Act and Commercial Courts Act (7 February 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of Interim Awards under Arbitration and Conciliation Act: IFFCO vs. Bhadra Products (23 January 2018)

/ Arbitral Award, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 16, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Judges, Navin Sinha, R.F. Nariman

Supreme Court Clarifies Interim Awards Under Arbitration Act: IFFCO vs. Bhadra Products (2018) Date of the Judgment: 23 January 2018 Citation: M/S Indian Farmers Fertilizer Co-Operative Limited v. M/S Bhadra Products (2018) INSC 47 Judges: R.F. Nariman, J. and Navin Sinha, J. Can an arbitrator’s decision on the issue of limitation be considered an interim

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of Interim Awards under Arbitration and Conciliation Act: IFFCO vs. Bhadra Products (23 January 2018) Read Post »

Scroll to Top