Is there any harm in mediating domestic violence related cases without court order?
A victim must be informed about her right to choose her course of action and be guided about her legal rights under the Act and there shall be no pressure upon her to settle her claim or grievance.
Whether clause 16 of the Deed of Partnership is a valid 'arbitration agreement'?
Arbitration agreement must disclose a determination through words used in the agreement and obligation on behalf of parties to refer disputes to arbitration.
Where there is merely a possibility of the parties agreeing to arbitration in the future, in contrast to an obligation to refer disputes to arbitration, there is no valid and binding arbitration agreement.
Whether issues related to Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) can be subject to arbitral proceedings?
Subject matter arbitrability is the core principle which is used to determine which disputes must be solved by arbitration and which disputes should be reserved for courts only. The crux of the dispute is dissected and examined before deciding the means of dispute resolution through this principle.
Whether the issue is such that it will be covered by domestic arbitration under Part I of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 or an international arbitration under Part II of the Act?
Whether GMR Energy should be made a party to arbitration proceedings?
Whether on the Basis of Pleas in the notice of arbitration issued by Doosan India, a case is made out to subject GMR Energy to arbitration along with GCEL and GIL?
Whether the Arbitral Tribunal has jurisdiction to pierce the corporate veil?
The SIAC Rules, which are one of the top five arbitration institutions in the world lay down a flexible and efficient mechanism of conducting arbitration proceedings. Rule 7 of the 2016 SIAC Rules allows for third parties to seek intervention in arbitration proceedings as well.
The Principle of Alter-Ego, a legal doctrine where a corporation or entity is so heavily dominated that its own identity is ignored, to the extent that it is a mere instrumentality or conduit of its dominators, the two must be treated as one and the same.
Whether an arbitration agreement in an unstamped document can be enforceable?
While the principle of severability states that an arbitration clause is individual from the main contract, the concept is clarified and although an arbitration clause is separate, it cannot be an independent agreement when the contract has not been stamped as required by the law. Under the principle, the arbitration clause is rendered independent when the due process is followed and the entirety of the contract is held valid and enforceable.
Whether there is a properly concluded contract between the parties?
Where would the seat of arbitration be?
Courts have to adopt a practical and flexible approach and think like a “reasonable business person.”
It is the court’s duty to make an ‘unworkable’ clause workable by looking into the intention of the parties and by making necessary changes.
Whether acquiescence of arbitration binds the parties to continue with arbitration?
Whether the agreement between parties arises from the arbitration clause or not?
A Letter of Intent (LOI) can be construed as a binding contract if it is followed by conduct that is consistent with the existence of a contract.
Whether it is permissible to refer a criminal matter such as under section 138, for settlement through mediation?
What would be the consequences of the breach of such settlement accepted by the Court?
Even though the statute i.e. Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act) is punitive in nature; its spirit, intendment and object is to provide compensation and ensure restitution and these are the aspects which must receive priority over punishment. The proceedings under Section 138 of the NI Act are therefore, distinct from other criminal cases.
Whether a non-signatory or third party can be subjected to arbitration without their consent in exceptional circumstances?
What is the ambit and scope of section 45 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996?
The “Group of Companies” doctrine, was observed in this case for the first time in Indian legal history, and it stated that an arbitration agreement entered into by a company, being one within a group of companies, can bind its non- signatory affiliates or sister or parent concerns, if the circumstances demonstrate, that the mutual intention of all the parties was to bind both- the signatories and the non-signatory affiliates, while being in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
Whether an arbitration clause will not form a part of the Bill of Lading merely because it is formed in the annexure to the agreement?
Whether an arbitration clause is required to be signed by all parties in order for it to be binding on the parties?
The arbitration clause in an annexure of an agreement is considered to be part of the main agreement based on the intention of the parties.
The only pre-requisite for valid arbitration agreement is it must be in writing as stated in Section 7(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Signing by the parties is not necessary.