This article intends to analyze how the reasoning that the doctrine operates independent of corporate law is at best evasive.

[Harshal and Shaswat are students at Gujarat National Law University.] The recent judgement passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India...

The need to recognize and strengthen institutional arbitration in India is now stronger than ever.

Lombardi posed a situation that would have allowed the doctrine of unconscionability to be strengthened in contract and arbitration law.

By harmoniously constructing relevant legislations, a court under a Section 11 will not dwell on the stamping of an agreement.

The status of the 'group of companies' doctrine in Indian arbitral jurisprudence has been finally settled by the Supreme Court.

The Delhi High Court’s stance on third-party funding is a welcome decision in light of India’s pro-arbitration policy.

To improve the enforcement of arbitration awards, one step is to establish more benches for time-bound disposal of execution petitions.

SC has held that an agreement containing an arbitration clause is unenforceable in law if it is not stamped or is insufficiently stamped.

If an improper construction of Section 36 of Stamp Act is allowed, it would defeat the original purpose of safeguarding state revenue.

It may be prudent for the SC to issue clarifications with respect to the various matters in question which remain unanswered in NN Global.

The author analyses NN Global by comparing it to the pre-conditions of this judgment and its impact on the arbitration mechanism in India.

The article examines whether amicus curiae are enough to protect human rights of local communities in investment arbitration.

Authors discuss the nature of the requirement of notice of arbitration as to whether serving it is compulsory or a mere technicality.

The author remarks that in India, the average disposal time of Section 34 applications is alarmingly high and discusses possible solutions.

The Supreme Court must advance an interpretation of second proviso to Section 36(3) based on some guidelines and the scope of Section 34.

Per the author, the Indian jurisprudence lacks a coherent test to determine whether a pre-arbitral clause is mandatory or directory.

Author argues that the in rem vs in personnam test is often futile for determining the arbitrability of IPR disputes.

The article examines the jurisprudence around group-of-companies doctrine and analyses its transplantation into India.

As per author, the emphasis of courts must be on creating systems that make mandatory fulfilment of Section 12A worthwhile for parties.

The author examines the duality in perceiving determinability of contracts in India.

The authors aim at analyzing some of the pertinent questions of law attached with mediation as a compulsory form of dispute resolution.

Authors remark that the Specific Relief (Amendment) Act 2018 created issues in terms of its application due to ambiguous drafting.

Authors appreciate the notable strides made by judiciary to achieve minimal interference in arbitration but also suggest improvements here.