"I realise that some of my criticisms may be mistaken; but to refuse to criticize judgements for fear of being mistaken is to abandon criticism altogether... If any of my criticisms are found to be correct, the cause is served; and if any are found to be incorrect the very process of finding out my mistakes must lead to the discovery of the right reasons, or better reasons than I have been able to give, and the cause is served just as well." -Mr. HM Seervai, Preface to the 1st ed., Constitutional Law of India.

Friday, October 16, 2009

Article in SSRN

I have written a paper titled "Negotiating Procedural Rules in Arbitration Clauses: Beware What You Ask For". The paper can be found here. The abstract is as below:

"Often parties negotiating agreements are wholly unaware of the significance of choice of the seat of arbitration, substantive law of contract or procedural rules they agree to. When disputes arise, the party complaining breach is often taken by surprise at the way in which the poorly-negotiated/ drafted arbitration clause acts as a hurdle in enforcing its rights under the contract. In this essay, two cases are discussed in which the parties seem to have negotiated the arbitration clause without understanding the implications of the arbitral procedures they have agreed to."

Comments on the paper are welcome.

No comments: