Supreme Court overrules Bhatia International Case

Bhatia International Case over ruled

It was held by the Honourable Supreme Court that Indian courts have no jurisdiction to pass interim orders in foreign arbitration awards between an Indian company and a foreign company under the provisions of the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Earlier in the year 2002, while hearing Bhatia International case, Honourable SC held that, Part I of the Arbitration Act, dealing with the power of a court to grant interim relief, could be applied to arbitration disputes with a foreign seat unless the parties specifically opted out of such an arrangement. As a result, various High Courts had entertained appeals and were passing interim orders against such awards.

The present Constitution Bench judgment overrules the 2002 ruling and held that, “if the arbitration agreement is found or held to provide for a seat/place of arbitration outside India, then the provision that the Arbitration Act, 1996, would govern the arbitration proceedings would not make Part I (relating to domestic arbitration) of the Arbitration Act, 1996, applicable or enable Indian courts to exercise supervisory jurisdiction over the arbitration or the award…” Read More

Read Complete Judgment

Supreme Court refused to frame guidelines on sub judice matters

The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to frame guidelines across the board for reporting sub judice matters but laid down a constitutional principle under which aggrieved parties can seek postponement of publication of court hearings.

A five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice S H Kapadia said it was laying down the constitutional principle which will allow the aggrieved parties to seek from appropriate court the postponement of the publication of court hearings.

The bench said the concerned court will decide the question of postponement of reporting court proceedings on case-by-case basis.

“We are not framing guidelines but we have laid down constitutional principle and appropriate writ courts will decide when the postponement order has to be passed on case-by-case basis,” the bench also comprising justices D K Jain, S S Nijjar, Ranjana Prakash Desai and J S Khehar said.

“Hence, guidelines on media reporting cannot be framed across the board,” the bench said… Read More

The Supreme Court controversially lays down that postponement of publication of court hearings can be considered on a case-by-case basis, raising fears that it could be misused by influential litigants.

Read Complete Judgment.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *