Access MJ Antony's piece in Business Standard on the latest judgements of the Indian Supreme Court on arbitration from this link. In this article, MJ Antony criticises the time taken by the judiciary to decide on issues pertaining to arbitration.
Ankit Goyal & Vivekananda N have penned an article in moneycontrol.com on India and the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC). Generally, parties in India prefer to have their arbitrations in Singapore than in prominent arbitration centres like London, Paris or Switzerland.
ADR Prof Blog has a post on the possibility of limiting the applicability of the US Supreme Court's decision in AT & T v Concepcion. We had a couple of posts on the decision (here and here). The attempt to read-down the decision is because of the Majority's view that the fact that the impugned arbitration clause provided that in case the arbitral award was greater than the last settlement offer of AT&T, AT & T would pay $ 7500 and twice the attorney fees to the petitioners. According to the court, this would adequately compensate the petitioners in case they were entitled to it. The court was of the view the the petitioners were better of as individual petitioners than as a member of a class.
Ankit Goyal & Vivekananda N have penned an article in moneycontrol.com on India and the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC). Generally, parties in India prefer to have their arbitrations in Singapore than in prominent arbitration centres like London, Paris or Switzerland.
ADR Prof Blog has a post on the possibility of limiting the applicability of the US Supreme Court's decision in AT & T v Concepcion. We had a couple of posts on the decision (here and here). The attempt to read-down the decision is because of the Majority's view that the fact that the impugned arbitration clause provided that in case the arbitral award was greater than the last settlement offer of AT&T, AT & T would pay $ 7500 and twice the attorney fees to the petitioners. According to the court, this would adequately compensate the petitioners in case they were entitled to it. The court was of the view the the petitioners were better of as individual petitioners than as a member of a class.
No comments:
Post a Comment