Erosion of ‘Party Autonomy’ under the ‘Expedited Procedure’ Rule: An Institutional Arbitration perspective

by Soumyajit Saha*

‘Expedited Procedure’ Rules of SIAC, LCIA, ICC

In an attempt to reduce the time for adjudication of arbitral disputes, leading arbitral institutions like Singapore International Arbitration Centre (“SIAC”), ICC Court of International Arbitration (“ICC”) and London Court of International Arbitration (“LCIA”) have revised their respective rules and included the concept of ‘Expedited Procedure’ in their rules of procedure. Under the ‘Expedited Procedure’, arbitral institutions are given the liberty to reduce the time period in order to constitute the arbitral tribunal and a duty is cast upon the tribunal to render the award within six months mandatorily. Pursuant to Rule 5.1 of Singapore International Arbitration Centre Rules, 2016 (“SIAC Rules”), one of the parties may apply for the arbitral proceedings to be conducted in accordance with the ‘Expedited Procedure’. Similarly, Article 30 and Appendix VI of ICC Court of International Arbitration Rules (“ICC Rules”) deals with ‘Expedited Procedure’ rule. A close reading of Article 30 and Article II, Appendix VI of ICC Rules, Rule 5 of SIAC Rules and Article 9.3 of LCIA Arbitration Rules, 2014 indicates that scope of party autonomy has been given a limited view.

Read More »

Transparency in International Commercial Arbitration: The Road Ahead

By Sarthak Malhotra 

In 1995, a former Secretary General of the ICC International Court of Arbitration, Stephen R. Bond, in an article, noted that the users of international commercial arbitration “almost invariably” mentioned the fact that the arbitral proceedings and the resulting award do not enter into the public domain as a feature which attracted parties to it.[1] Whether confidentiality is an essential feature of international arbitration cannot be stated with certainty, considering how the New York Convention and the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration do not expressly recognize it.Read More »

The Role of Arbitration in response to Increasing Foreign Direct Investment In India- Reverence and Lessons from the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC)

By Digvijay Dam*

Hon’ble PM Narendra Modi’s vision for the “Make in India” campaign is gaining an impressive momentum in the international fora, which is evident from the fact that India has received around $19.78 billion of foreign investment after the NDA government came into power. However, where there are investments, there are bound to occur some inevitable disputes, which are needed to be resolved in a swift and an amicable way. Here comes the need for a robust arbitration mechanism to deal with such kinds of disputes, as the parties generally tend to avoid litigation in courts. Post the enactment of the Indian Arbitration and the Conciliation Act 1996; India has not been a favorable destination for arbitration, due to a plethora of problems for eg. the issue of enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in India (White Industries Australia Limited v. Republic of India), the issue of interference of the Indian Judiciary in arbitrations seated outside India (Bharat Aluminum v. Kaiser Aluminum Technical Services[1] reconsidering the decision Read More »