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.


Article tags

Related categories

Key contacts

Simon Chapman KC photo

Simon Chapman KC

Partner, Regional Head of Practice - Dispute Resolution, Asia, Global Co-Head of International Arbitration, Hong Kong

范芷君 photo

范芷君

中国区管理合伙人, Hong Kong