The Shashoua judgment represents a watershed moment in the evolution of Section 48 public policy jurisprudence, particularly in its application to complex shareholders dispute arbitration. The court’s sophisticated analysis validates contractual deadlock resolution mechanisms while maintaining necessary boundaries between arbitral authority and statutory regulation.

The IBC amendment marks a significant step in India’s insolvency law. By introducing CIIRP, Parliament has signaled a shift towards even greater creditor empowerment and flexibility. CIIRP’s shorter timelines and creditor-led design mirror global best practices (akin to pre-packaged restructurings), potentially speeding up resolutions and preserving value.

This blog examines the introduced amendments and analyses how they will accelerate corporate restructuring and create a more predictable environment for foreign and domestic investors. The blog further identifies the potential challenges and considerations that need to be addressed for the amendments to be beneficial for India’s market economy.

The NCLAT’s ruling, though doctrinally clear, exposes a structural vulnerability: the potential for disguised preferences routed through third parties. India’s insolvency regime must evolve beyond formalism.

The Bill's establishment of group insolvency and cross-border insolvency frameworks is significant as it illustrates India's evolution as a sophisticated player in the global insolvency sector.

India lacks a formal mechanism to address cross-border insolvency and restructuring. In practice, resolution of such matter’s hinges on ad hoc court-to-court cooperation or the recognition of foreign judgments under the Civil Procedure Code 1908.

IBC’s objectives of focusing on time-bound resolution and asset maximization must be reconciled with the DPDP Act’s mandate to respect informational self-determination.

Corporate strategy, financial intelligence, and regulatory discipline interact cautiously in the CCD ecosystem. Companies must view CCD transactions as long-term commitments to governance, transparency, and shareholder fairness rather than just as capital-raising activities.

The author argues that the Indian position of barring arbitration for O&M suits should be relaxed for the few companies that have been recognized by courts as quasi-partnerships.

The Bhushan Power case will be studied as a cautionary tale. On one side, it underscores that insolvency laws are not toy models to be treated lightly; procedural rules serve the code’s integrity. On the other, it delivers a jolt by showing that even long-implemented deals can be unwound for technical lapses, a double-edged signal to investors and professionals alike.

The divergent fate of Byju’s-Aakash and BPSL indicate the increasing complexities of corporate restructuring in India, where the inflexible requirements of statutory compliance frequently come into conflict with the exigencies of business rescue.

Although the Supreme Court of India’s decision has garnered significant criticism, it is not without its merits. It emphasizes how the integrity of the insolvency process must remain sacred. The IBC transcends the role of a simple debt recovery mechanism; it is a framework rooted in legal principles and the equitable treatment of all stakeholders involved.

In this article, the author identifies two major challenges revealed by the impugned judgments: lack of a statutory time limit to implement resolution plans and imprecise role of monitoring committees in ensuring implementation of resolution plans.

A regulatory shift is needed. ‘Super-priority utility claims’ would introduce vital services protection, and balance would be maintained through a tiered debt resolution system. A non-retroactivity clause can protect resolution applicants from post settlement litigation. Moreover, a strategically funded PCLF would guard against unforeseen claims and improve CIRP performance.

The NCLT’s decision reaffirms the principle that a clear distinction must be maintained between the provision of IBC and PMLA.

This blog analyses the merger process under the new rules while comparing it with the process under older regulations,

The tribunal’s stance to reject Philips’ application for capital reduction reflects a restrictive and flawed interpretation of the law.

The codification of the BJR would balance judicial interference with independence in corporate decision-making.

The authors conclude that the dictum is prone to irony and contradicts the objectives of the IBC.

MCA streamlines and simplifies the regulatory framework for transnational mergers.

NCLT must evolve to address the complexities of family-owned businesses, recognizing the impact of family dynamics on corporate governance.

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

It is important that the law laid down in the case of Hari Babu Thota be reviewed.

The recent Supreme Court judgment has brought forth a crucial clarification regarding the limitation for filing appeals under Section 61.