Clear legislative reform is essential to resolve the existing uncertainties around the power of arbitral tribunals to implead non-signatories.

Subsequent to the Mahakali judgment adopting a clear stance that the MSMED Act would override the provisions of A&C Act, the party autonomy in the arbitration agreements involving an MSME, has taken a backseat.

In this piece, the author argues that the decision of the SC in Disortho has two main problems. First, the court fails to appropriately decide the seat. Second, the law laid down by the SC is problematic due to its misconceived implementation of party intention and the principle of separability. 

While the power of modification may not necessarily be antagonizing to the Indian arbitration regime, the source of such power shall be through legislative means rather than judicial craftiness.

Gayatri Balasamy seeks to avoid the blunt injustice of all-or-nothing review, but its doctrinal scaffolding is built on inference rather than enactment.

Courts must look at granting post expiry extensions judiciously in exceptional cases and imposing relevant costs and conditions so as to provide an implicit direction and judicial nudge towards a more proactive approach of seeking extensions on a genuine need basis instead of paving the way for more dilatory tactics. 

Navigating symmetrical arbitration clauses can be challenging, but the judgement in Tarun Dhameja is a positive development.

To bolster the idea of reducing the intervention of courts in an arbitration proceeding, the principles of Scott v. Avery clause is one of the means.

This piece begins with an appraisal of the Supreme Court’s reasoning and then addresses the remaining concerns.

There is need for further clarification on the assignability of arbitration agreements.

We are yet to see a case where an Indian court grants an anti-suit injunction in support of a foreign-seated arbitration.

The selective applicability of the provisions of Section 14 to only domestic-seated arbitrations results in several complexities.

Arbitration can be initiated while dealing with shareholder disputes if it is found that the origin of the dispute lies in the agreement.

It remains to be seen whether the court will use its curative power to alter the arbitral award within its power to set it aside under S 34.

[Akash and Simone are students at Maharashtra National Law University, Mumbai.] Arbitration as a form of dispute resolution is in itself...

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

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

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

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

This article seeks to analyse the ambit of Section 26 and the implications of the judgment of Ellora Paper Mills in this regard.

The author explains the decision in Arcelor Mittal and thereafter examines the impact that it has on emergency awards in India.

The authors examine the judgment of the Supreme Court in PASL v. GE that pertained to selection of a foreign seat by Indian parties.