Nlsir Concept Note
THE 6TH NLSIR SYMPOSIUM
MAPPING THE FUTURE OF COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION IN INDIA The last three years have witnessed dynamic shifts in the law and practice of Arbitration in India. While there have been steps in the right direction, an unwieldy system continues to weigh down practitioners. Four years after first delving into the nuances of commercial arbitration in India, the NLSIR Symposium (now in its sixth edition) hopes to assess the development of Arbitration Law over the last few years. Day One focuses on the judiciary and its reading of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Day Two focuses on the structural changes needed in the Indian system, for dealing with matters under the 1996 Act as well as under Bilateral Investment Treaties. Session I: The Implications of BALCO on Arbitration Practice On the 6th of September 2012, the Supreme Court delivered its much-awaited verdict in Bharat Aluminium v. Kaiser Aluminium. The decision was widely lauded and, in the eyes of most commentators, set right the perceived wrongs of Bhatia International and Venture Global. However, the impact of this decision is yet to be discussed in detail. The first session of the Symposium focuses on four specific questions arising out of the judgment. First, it may be observed that Justice Nijjar’s opinion looks beyond merely a harmonious construction of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Court deemed it “necessary to analyse the text of the Arbitration Act, 1996 with reference to its legislative history and international conventions”. Consequently, the Court notes the Act’s moorings in the UNCITRAL Model Law and the principle of territoriality embedded therein. Interestingly, the text of s. 28 and s. 45 of the Act both seem to suggest that the territorial basis of the Act may not be absolute. Was the Supreme Court’s decision justified in light of the text of the statute? Second, the Court veered away from treating s. 9 as sui generis. The primary impact of such a move
MAPPING THE FUTURE OF COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION IN INDIA The last three years have witnessed dynamic shifts in the law and practice of Arbitration in India. While there have been steps in the right direction, an unwieldy system continues to weigh down practitioners. Four years after first delving into the nuances of commercial arbitration in India, the NLSIR Symposium (now in its sixth edition) hopes to assess the development of Arbitration Law over the last few years. Day One focuses on the judiciary and its reading of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Day Two focuses on the structural changes needed in the Indian system, for dealing with matters under the 1996 Act as well as under Bilateral Investment Treaties. Session I: The Implications of BALCO on Arbitration Practice On the 6th of September 2012, the Supreme Court delivered its much-awaited verdict in Bharat Aluminium v. Kaiser Aluminium. The decision was widely lauded and, in the eyes of most commentators, set right the perceived wrongs of Bhatia International and Venture Global. However, the impact of this decision is yet to be discussed in detail. The first session of the Symposium focuses on four specific questions arising out of the judgment. First, it may be observed that Justice Nijjar’s opinion looks beyond merely a harmonious construction of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Court deemed it “necessary to analyse the text of the Arbitration Act, 1996 with reference to its legislative history and international conventions”. Consequently, the Court notes the Act’s moorings in the UNCITRAL Model Law and the principle of territoriality embedded therein. Interestingly, the text of s. 28 and s. 45 of the Act both seem to suggest that the territorial basis of the Act may not be absolute. Was the Supreme Court’s decision justified in light of the text of the statute? Second, the Court veered away from treating s. 9 as sui generis. The primary impact of such a move