[This guest post is authored by Shubham Gandhi, 3rd year student and Tanish Gupta, 2nd year student at National Law University, Jabalpur, India] No Power to Modify The Award Under Section 34: Clearing The Mist Introduction The Supreme Court of India, on July 20, 2021, in the case of National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) … Continue reading No Power to Modify The Award Under Section 34: Clearing The Mist
Section 34
Patel Engineering v NEEPCO: Supreme Court sets aside Award for Patent Illegality
This post is authored by Hitesh Nagpal. He is a third-year student at Maharashtra National Law University, Mumbai. Patel Engineering v NEEPCO: Supreme Court sets aside Award for Patent Illegality On 22 May 2020, the Supreme Court in Patel Engineering Ltd. v. North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Ltd. reaffirmed the scope of ‘patent illegality’, which … Continue reading Patel Engineering v NEEPCO: Supreme Court sets aside Award for Patent Illegality
SEAMEC v. OIL (II): Has the Supreme Court Overstepped its Mandate under Section 34?
[This guest post is authored by Malak Bhatt (Advocate on Record, Supreme Court of India) and Atreyo Banerjee (Advocate). They are part of the Chambers of Malak Bhatt. The authors can be reached at malakbhatt@gmail.com and atreyobanerjee2019@gmail.com] SEAMEC v. OIL (II): Has the Supreme Court Overstepped its Mandate under Section 34? The Supreme Court of … Continue reading SEAMEC v. OIL (II): Has the Supreme Court Overstepped its Mandate under Section 34?
SEAMEC v. OIL: Supreme Court on Power to Examine Plausibility of Arbitral Tribunal’s Interpretation of Contract
[This guest post is authored by Saurish Shetye. Saurish is an advocate practicing at the Bombay High Court. He can be reached at saurish.shetye@gmail.com] SEAMEC v. OIL: Supreme Court on Power to Examine the Plausibility of Arbitral Tribunal’s Interpretation of Contract In its recent decision, dated 11 May 2020, the Supreme Court in South East … Continue reading SEAMEC v. OIL: Supreme Court on Power to Examine Plausibility of Arbitral Tribunal’s Interpretation of Contract
Quippo Construction v. Janardhan Nirman: Right to Object to the Venue in a Domestic Arbitration
[This guest post is authored by Ritika Acharya, a student at Maharashtra National Law University (MNLU), Mumbai. Any query regarding this article can be addressed to her at ritikaacharya@mnlumumbai.edu.in] Quippo Construction v. Janardhan Nirman: Right to Object to the Venue in a Domestic Arbitration On 29 April 2020, the Supreme Court ruled in Quippo Construction Equipment … Continue reading Quippo Construction v. Janardhan Nirman: Right to Object to the Venue in a Domestic Arbitration
IAB Annual Review: India’s Key Judicial Developments on Arbitration Law in 2018
2018 was a rather interesting year for India’s evolving arbitration landscape. Among other things, last year witnessed several clarificatory decisions on arbitration that were much needed for much long. While Parliament was preparing to enact yet another amendment to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act), Indian courts continued to interpret and flesh out … Continue reading IAB Annual Review: India’s Key Judicial Developments on Arbitration Law in 2018
Supreme Court’s Modification of Dual Interest Rate in India-seated ICA Award: An Unwarranted Interference?
Disputes arose between Vedanta and Shenzen Shedong under four EPC contracts; each providing for arbitration seated in Mumbai governed by Indian law. While Shenzen sought damages in US Dollars, Euros and Indian Rupees, the tribunal allowed only the latter two. The tribunal also awarded a 9% uniform interest on the decretal amount, calculated from the … Continue reading Supreme Court’s Modification of Dual Interest Rate in India-seated ICA Award: An Unwarranted Interference?
Koinos 