Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Arbitration Law: Arbitrators Has To Disclose Potential Conflicts Of Interest: Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a groundbreaking decision, the Supreme Court of India has issued a ruling that emphasizes the crucial duty of arbitrators to disclose potential conflicts of interest. The judgment, delivered on October 19, 2023, by a bench comprising Hon'ble Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Hon'ble Justice Aravind Kumar, addresses critical aspects of arbitration proceedings in India.

The judgment delves into the interpretation and application of various sections of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, shedding light on the independence and impartiality of arbitrators. In a significant observation, the Court stated, "Arbitrators must meticulously adhere to their duty of disclosure, ensuring transparency and fairness in the arbitration process."

The ruling also draws parallels with international standards, citing the IBA Guidelines (International Bar Association Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Arbitration) as a reference point for arbitrators' conduct. The Court noted, "The incorporation of IBA Guidelines underscores the importance of aligning Indian arbitration practices with global best practices."

One of the key highlights of the judgment is its comparison with the UK Supreme Court decision in Halliburton Company v Chubb Bermuda Insurance Ltd, 2021. The Court remarked, "The Halliburton decision serves as a guiding precedent, aligning the Indian arbitration landscape with international jurisprudence."

The judgment explores the statutory and non-statutory grounds for challenging arbitrators, providing clarity on when and how these grounds can be invoked. It underscores the significance of a robust and impartial arbitration process, stating, "The integrity of arbitration hinges on arbitrators' unwavering commitment to impartiality."

The decision also references various cases, including M/s. Voestalpine Schienen GMBH v. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., HRD, Bharat Broad Band, ONGC, and National Highways Authority of India & Ors. vs. Gayatri Jhansi Roadways Limited & Ors., to illustrate its legal reasoning.

This landmark ruling is expected to have far-reaching implications for arbitration in India, reinforcing the importance of transparency and fairness in dispute resolution. It sends a strong message to arbitrators to uphold their duty of disclosure, ultimately enhancing the credibility and effectiveness of arbitration proceedings in the country.

Date of Decision: 19 October 2023

CHENNAI METRO RAIL LIMITED ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING    vs M/S TRANSTONNELSTROY AFCONS (JV) & ANR.     

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/19-Oct-2023-Chennai_Metro_Rail.pdf"]

Latest Legal News