Research and Articles

NDA-Hotline

- Debt Funding in India Series
- Private Equity Corner
- The Startups Series
- Court Corner
- Investment Funds: Monthly Digest
- Insolvency and Bankruptcy Hotline
- Deal Destination
- New Publication
- M&A Interactive
- Lit Corner
- Private Debt Hotline
- Food & Beverages Hotline
- Companies Act Series
- Gaming Law Wrap
- Private Client Wrap
- GIFT City Express
- Regulatory Hotline
- Capital Markets Hotline
- Tax Hotline
- Corpsec Hotline
- Dispute Resolution Hotline
- M&A Hotline
- Pharma & Healthcare Update
- Competition Law Hotline
- HR Law Hotline
- IP Hotline
- Telecom Hotline
- FEMA Hotline
- Social Sector Hotline
- iCe Hotline
- SEZ Hotline
- Media Hotline
- Funds Hotline
- Education Sector Hotline
- International Trade Hotlines
- Other Hotline
- Real Estate Update
- Realty Check
- White Collar and Investigations Practice
- Legal Update
- IP Lab
- Cross Examination
- Technology & Tax Series
- Technology Law Analysis
- Yes, Governance Matters.
- Financial Service Update
- Japan Desk ジャパンデスク
Dispute Resolution Hotline
December 20, 2018India: Supreme Court settles the "seat" vs "venue" debate
This article was originally published in the December 2018 edition of
International Arbitration Law Review
BRIEF INTRODUCTION:
In this article, we discuss the recent Supreme Court ruling in the case of Union of India v Hardy Exploration and Production (India) Inc., Civil Appeal No.4628 of 2018. The Supreme Court of India was faced with the question of which laws would be applicable to post-award arbitration proceedings when the parties have agreed upon only the "venue" of arbitration and not the "seat" of arbitration. The Court interpreted the arbitration agreement between the parties and the reference to the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration 1985 to determine the seat of arbitration.
For complete article, please click here.