INDIAN SUPREME COURT’S APPROACH TO EMERGENCY ARBITRATOR DECISION
In the past few years, India’s arbitration law has undergone several significant changes with the goal of making India a more arbitration-friendly jurisdiction and an attractive arbitral seat. In particular, the revisions address the limitation of state court interference in arbitration proceedings and strengthen institutional arbitration as opposed to ad hoc arbitration, which has traditionally been common in India.
Apart from legislative amendments, Indian courts have also played an important role by being increasingly supportive of arbitration proceedings, as highlighted in the recent case Amazon.com NV Investment Holdings LLC v. Future Retail Limited & Others. In this case, the Indian Supreme Court held that an emergency arbitrator’s decision resulting from an India-seated arbitration and issued under the Arbitration Rules of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) prior to the constitution of the arbitral tribunal was enforceable in India. While the enforceability of awards and orders of emergency arbitrators is internationally widely discussed, this latest judgement of the Indian Supreme Court shows an enforcement-friendly approach and will likely be an important precedent.
Brief background of the case
In Amazon vs. Future Retail, the arbitral seat was in New Delhi and the claimant initiated arbitration proceedings under the SIAC Rules. In the period between the filing of the claimant’s notice of arbitration and the constitution of the arbitral tribunal, an emergency arbitrator was appointed who issued an ‘interim award’ in favour of the claimant, injuncting the other side from proceeding with the disputed transaction.
Jan-Mar 2022 issue
Hogan Lovells