Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Modes of Alternative Dispute Resolution: Arbitration
Modes of Alternative Dispute Resolution: Arbitration
Arbitration
Arbitration, a type of alternative dispute
resolution (ADR), is a strategy for resolving
conflicts outside of the court system in which
the parties to a disagreement refer it to one or
more people, known as arbitrators, to whom
they intend to be bound by their judgement.
Conciliation
Lok Adalat It is a form of alternative dispute resolution in
It is a judicial body and a dispute settlement which the parties to a dispute hire a conciliator to
help them resolve their issues individually.
organization established for social justice by the
citizens themselves, based on the settlement or They do this by reducing conflicts, strengthening
agreement obtained through formal coordination, identifying problems, offering
technical assistance, discussing possible solutions
negotiations. and bringing about a negotiated settlement.
Ad-hoc Institutional
Arbitration Arbitration
Domestic or
Statutory
International
Arbitration
Arbitration
Definition of Alternative Dispute Resolution
✓ Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is defined as encompassing all
legally-permitted processes of dispute resolution other than litigation
✓ It is also seen as an umbrella term that refers generally to alternatives
to the court adjudication of disputes such as negotiation, mediation,
arbitration, mini-trial and summary trial
✓ ADR is also known as appropriate dispute resolution
✓ Also known as Amicable dispute resolution
✓ It is seen as «a colloquialism for allowing a dispute to drop or as an
alternative to violence
ADR as a Process
✓ There are different kinds of ADR processes. One process differs from
the other. The notable ADR processes are: «negotiation, mediation,
arbitration, settlements, summary jury trial, early neutral evaluation,
the mini-trial, consensus building, and negotiated rule-making.
ADR is Voluntary
✓ Disputants decide voluntarily to use ADR to resolve their differences.
ADR thrives under the principle of self-determination of the disputants
to use legally accepted procedure to resolve a conflict other than
litigation. No one is coerced to enter into ADR. It is a voluntary process
unlike litigation where respondents can be subpoenaed to respond to
charges or provide evidence in public court of law.
ADR is Confidential
✓ Often there is much public interest when a case is under litigation and
with the media sometimes giving details of court proceedings. However,
ADR is private and confidential. Its practitioners are bound by their
code of ethics to preserve the privacy of their clients.
(Memes Edition)
✓ Further, the decision given by the Lok Adalat is binding and shall be
treated akin to the order of a civil court., thereby increasing poor
people’s access to justice.
Pros of ADR
It is free from
It is less
the
expensive.
technicalities
It is less time
consuming.
Cons of ADR
Not helpful
ADR is less where a dispute
suitable when is to be decided
there is a need on the basis of
for a precedent.
enforcement.
of ADR with
the
detailed
Explanation
Section 7
⚫ The parties need to sign the Arbitration Agreement and the decision shall
be binding on the parties. If you are a party to any contract and if you
wish to resolve any disputes with the help of an Arbitrator, without going
to court, then you should make this agreement.
2. Intention
3. Signature
6. Governing Law – This is the law that governs the main point of contention
between the parties to a dispute. It is even known as the substantive law.
The parties should mention the law they want to be governed by, failing
which may give way to disputes in the future.
⚫ The party applying for arbitration under subsection (1) must submit the
application along with a copy of the arbitration agreement and a petition
asking the court to order the other party to produce the original arbitration
agreement if either the original arbitration agreement or a certified copy
thereof is not available to the party applying for the reference to arbitration
and the other party has retained the original arbitration agreement or
certified copy.
⚫ The fact that Section 8 has deviated shows how broad and inclusive the
statutory mission is. The terms "unless it deems that the agreement is null
and void, inoperative, and incapable of being performed" do not appear in
section 8, which instead refers to "judicial authority" in a broad sense.
⚫ Despite the fact that the situation is so obvious, this clause has often been
interpreted differently by our courts, which has caused a lot of confusion.
When the requirements of section 8 are met, regardless of the current
situation, courts have taken the literal interpretation approach and have
interpreted the clause as it is intended to be, referring the dispute to
arbitration.
⚫ However, there have been cases where the courts have completely
disregarded legitimate precedents, interpreted a part hazily, refused a
reference, and otherwise deviated from the legitimate line of precedents.
⚫ Furthermore, the deviation is not the only issue; in one case, the SC
actually went so far as to establish a few exceptions to the rule, which is
entirely incorrect in my opinion. In the event that there had been a need
for such exclusions, the legislature would have added them to the act
itself.
Section 9 and Section 17:
⚫ Analysis of Section 9 and Section 17 would lead us to the following
conclusions:-
– The new arbitration Act empowers the arbitral tribunal to pass orders
for giving interim relief while such power is not vested under the Old Act.
– Powers under Section 17 can be exercised only after the arbitral tribunal
is constituted and it stats functioning.
– Powers of court under section 9 are wide as the words “before, during or
after indicate so. A party can approach the court to seek interim measures
of protection even before the arbitration commences.
– Court’s powers are wide and have supremacy in granting interim relief.
However interference of court when Tribunal is constituted is minimum.
Section thirty-four provides that an arbitral award is also put aside by a court
on bound grounds such as that. These grounds are:
✓ Incapacity of a party
To ascertain the proper conduct of the arbitration proceedings, the law allows
certain remedies against an arbitral award. An aggrieved party may resort to
the law Court for setting aside the arbitral award on certain Grounds mentioned
under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1966.
➢ Grounds
In the case of TPI Ltd. V. Union of India, in a writ petition, it was contended
by the petitioner that an inherent right to set aside an arbitral award on the
grounds provided, should be present and in the absence of the same, section
34 should be considered as unconstitutional. Here, the court dismissed the writ
petition by stating that the arbitration is an alternate forum for the resolution
of a dispute and it is on the wish of the parties to opt in on their free will for
their matters and if they agree to the decision of the arbitral tribunal by mutual
agreement. There is no compulsion by any statute forcing the parties to resort
to the arbitration procedure.
The Part 1 (Section 34) of the Indian Arbitration Act 1996 furnishes the
grounds to challenge or set aside the award to be applicable only to the awards
within a state and not to the foreign awards. On 6th September 2012,
In Bharat Aluminium company V. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Service, the
Supreme Court held that the Indian Arbitration Act should be interpreted in a
way to give effect to the objective or purpose of the Indian parliament who
drafted this legislation. Such findings of the Supreme Court are applicable only
to the arbitration agreement executed after 6 September 2012.
In Bhatia Int. V. Bulk Trading case, the Supreme Court held that even though
there was no provision in Part 2 of the act providing for the challenge to a
foreign award, a petition to set aside the same would lie under section 34 (part
1) of the act which provides provisions of the domestic award will be applicable
to the foreign awards. The court held that the property in a dispute related to
the shares in the Indian Company situated in India necessarily needed Indian
laws to be followed to execute the award. The Court stated that in such a
situation the award must be attested on the measurement of public policy of
India and the Indian public policy cannot be affirmed through the
implementation of the award on any foreign strand/support.
Section 35
Arbitral award
The arbitral award or arbitration award refers to an arbitration hearing
decision made by an arbitration tribunal. An arbitral award is equal to a court
judgment. An arbitral award may be non-monetary in nature where the claims
of the entire claimant fail and there is no need for any party to pay any money.
The arbitral award shall be defined as any arbitral tribunal’s judgment on the
nature of the dispute referred to it and shall include a temporary,
interlocutory or partial arbitral award. The arbitral tribunal may grant an
interim arbitral award on any matter for which it will make a final arbitral
award at any time during the arbitral proceedings. The interim award may be
applied in the same way as a final award of arbitration. Unless otherwise
decided by the parties, a party may ask the arbitral tribunal to make an
additional arbitral award in respect of the claims raised in the arbitral
proceedings but omitted from the arbitral award within 30 days of receipt of
the arbitral award.
Domestic Award: Domestic award are those awards which are the outcomes
of domestic arbitration. It is confined to the territory of India, the parties
should have a nexus or birth of Indian origin, the territory essentially comes
into play for domestic arbitration purposes. The award given by an arbitral
tribunal in India or an award, even if it is given by a foreign state for a dispute
in which both parties are of Indian origin and the nationality is also regulated
by Indian law, also falls within the scope of domestic arbitration.
Domestic awards are governed by Part I of the Arbitration and Conciliation
Act, 1996. A domestic award is an award granted pursuant to Section 2 to 43
of the Act.
Part II of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996 deals with International
Arbitration or Foreign Arbitration. Section 44 of the Act defines with Foreign
Award.
In, Serajuddin v. Michael Golodetz The Calcutta High Court established the
necessary conditions for an arbitration to be referred to as ‘ foreign arbitration
‘ or the essential elements of a foreign arbitration where the award could also
be referred to as a foreign arbitration award. The important points laid were
as follow:
Different high courts have given different definitions of the limitation period
within which a party can impose an award in the case of foreign awards. The
Bombay High Court observed a foreign award in ‘Noy Vallesina v Jindal Drugs
Limited’ not to be a judgment, rendering it non-binding on parties unless it
was reported as enforceable by a competent court. In the ‘Compania Naviera
‘ Sodnoc ‘ v. Bharat Refineries Ltd.,’ on the other hand, the Madras High Court
referred to international awards as considered decrees.
In M/s. Fuerst Day Lawson Ltd v. Jindal Exports Ltd, the Supreme Court ruled
that there could be different stages in a single proceeding. A court can agree
on the enforceability of the award in the first proceeding. Once the
enforceability has been determined, more successful steps can be taken to
implement the same.
Section 37
An appeal lies from the following orders, and from no others, to the court
authorized by law to hear appeals from original decrees of the court passing
the order:
However, a three judge Bench of the Supreme Court has recently held, in
Centrotrade Minerals & Metal v. Hindustan Copper, that the parties may
provide for an appeal to lie from the award to an appellate arbitral tribunal.
Such a clause was held not to be contrary to the laws of the country and,
thus, enforceable. It appears that the scope of appeal in such cases is far
wider than an appeal to a court.
The Amendment Act has widened the ambit of appeal by including the order
refusing to refer the parties to arbitration under Section 8 of the Act.
Appeal shall also lie to a court from an order of the Arbitral Tribunal:
Moreover, no second appeal shall lie from an order passed in appeal under
this Section but nothing in Section 37 shall affect or take away any right to
appeal to the Supreme Court.
Section 89
Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which gives the Court the power to
refer the dispute for settlement or conciliation was introduced with a purpose
of an amicable, peaceful and mutual settlement between parties without the
intervention of the court. However, the issue is that even after more than a
decade of its implementation, the provision provided for ADR under Section
89 suffers from many anomalies. The constitutional validity of this section
was upheld but the frequency with which ADR is utilized for resolution of
disputes remains minute, which arises due to lack of knowledge about the
same or on account of the reluctance of the parties.
The High Court is empowered to make rules to all proceedings before the
Court under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
under Section 82. These rules however have to be consistent with the said
Act. The same power is conferred upon the Central Government under Section
84 of the Act. Contrary to this, when parties agree to go for arbitration under
section 89 of the code, the option of the parties to choose arbitration and the
procedure for the same is not contemplated by the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 and Section 82 and 84 has no application under these
circumstances.
Alternative
Dispute
Resolution
AMARESH PATEL
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR
Arbitration: Meaning, scope and
types
Arbitration is a procedure in which a dispute is submitted, by agreement of the parties, to one or
more arbitrators who make a binding decision on the dispute. In choosing arbitration, the parties
opt for a private dispute resolution procedure instead of going to court.
Key points of Arbitration
* Arbitration agreement- Existing and Future Disputes
* Excludes the court
* Not a judge
* Informal + formal
* Arbitration Award
* Binding like the decree
Principal Characteristics
•Arbitration is consensual
•The parties choose the arbitrator (s)
•Arbitration is neutral
•Arbitration is a confidential procedure
•The decision of the arbitral tribunal is final and easy to enforce
Arbitration
an arbitration is the reference of dispute or difference between not less than two
parties, for determination after hearing both sides in a judicial manner by a
person or persons other than a court of competent jurisdiction.
With the adoption of conciliation rules, 1980 by the UNCITRAL, the Parliament of
India also find it expedient and enacted Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
which gave statutory recognition to conciliation.
With this, the post-litigation conciliation was recognised as ADR with the
incorporation of section 89 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 providing an option
for reference of sub judice matters to conciliation with the consent of the parties.
Mediation
Mediation is a process wherein the parties meet with a mutually selected impartial and
neutral person who assists them in the negotiation of their differences.
Key Characteristic:
* Mediation is a non-binding procedure controlled by the parties.
* Mediation is a confidential procedure.
* Mediation is an interest-based procedure.
Mediation key points
* Usually court enforced
* Trained mediators
* Aim to settle
* Does not affects the court proceedings
* Very effective in solving personal disputes
* Lok Adalat
Conciliation
Conciliation is an alternative out-of-court dispute resolution instrument. Like mediation,
conciliation is a voluntary, flexible, confidential, and interest based process. The parties seek to
reach an amicable dispute settlement with the assistance of the conciliator, who acts as a neutral
third party.
Conciliation key points
No agreement pre disputes
Industrial disputes
Aims to settle
Not able to enforce
Trade union etc
Labour related matters
Key Difference Btwn
Mediator & Conciliator
Section 24
Saraswat Cooperative Bank Ltd. V.
Jaynit Agencies, (2012) SC Online
Bom 759
Held, an arbitration proceedings could not be dismissed
in default and arbitral was required to make the award
on the evidence available before it.
Section 25
Satgur Sewak Rice and General
Mills v. Punjab State Civil Supplies
Corpn Ltd, (2000) 2 ICC 639 (P &
H)
2018 2020
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet,
consectetuer adipiscing elit. consectetuer adipiscing elit.
Title lorem
Ipsum
2019