Appellate courts in India have sometimes been subject to criticism from international arbitration practitioners due to their interventionist approach (often under the guise of supervision) towards arbitration proceedings.
Therefore, it is worth noting the recent decision in Max India Limited v. General Binding Corporation (“Max“) in which the Delhi High Court rejected the appellant’s invitation to intervene and ruled that it should not grant interim relief to the applicant prior to the commencement of arbitral proceedings, as there was an alternate forum available to the parties in the Singapore courts. The decision was upheld on appeal by a division bench of the Delhi High Court.
The ruling contrasts with some other Indian court decisions, particularly in the context of the applicability of Part I of the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Act“) to international arbitrations seated outside India. Please click here to read our post on our Arbitration blog.
Key contacts
Simon Chapman KC
Partner, Regional Head of Practice - Dispute Resolution, Asia, Global Co-Head of International Arbitration, Hong Kong
Kathryn Sanger
合伙人, Hong Kong
范芷君
中国区管理合伙人, Hong Kong
Rachael Shek
Partner, Hong Kong
Disclaimer
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP and Prolegis LLC have established a Formal Law Alliance licensed by the Legal Services Regulatory Authority of Singapore known as Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer Prolegis Alliance, with Singapore law advice provided by Prolegis LLC. The two firms cooperate closely in Singapore to deliver a complementary and seamless legal service.