transforming commercial dispute resolution - the hindu

2
 3/7/2015 Transformi ng commer ci al di spute r esol uti on - The Hi ndu http://w w w.thehi n du.c om /t oday s- paper / tp-o pi ni o n/t ransf or m i ng- c om m er c i al - di spute-re s ol uti on/ ar ti cl e6967749. e ce 1/ 2 oday's Paper » OPINION Transforming commercial dispute resolution nirudh Krishnan he enactment of an Act to amend the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and passing the Commercial Division of High Courts Bill will hange the face of commercial dispute resolution HAND IN HAND:“In pursuance of its ‘ease of doing business’ propaganda, the government is set to introduce the two bills in Parliament.” Picture shows Prime Minister Narendra Modi with Indian businessmen in Gujarat.— PHOTO: AP Most judicial systems undergo periods of high pendency and delay in dispensation of justice which are usually followed  y a realisation from within and give rise to widescale legislative reforms. While it was the Lord Woolf Report and the Chief Justice’s Working Committee Report that spurred such a change in the U.K. and Hong Kong, the Justice A.P. Shah-led Law Commission Reports numbered 246 and 253 could potentially be what the Indian commercial dispute esolution system has been waiting for. These reports suggest widescale reforms by suggesting the enactment of an Act o amend the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and a “Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division f High Courts and the Commercial Courts Act” (Commercial Divisions Bill/Act), respectively. In pursuance of its ‘ease of doing business’ propaganda and an overall attempt to attract investors, the Bharatiya anata Party government is set to introduce these two bills in the budget session of Parliament. If passed and mplemented, these enactments are likely to change the face of commercial dispute resolution in India. Commercial Divisions Bill/Act he Commercial Divisions Act introduces a commercial division in every high court having original jurisdiction (i.e. Madras, Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta and Himachal Pradesh) and commercial courts in such districts, as the Central overnment, in consultation with the concerned State government and Chief Justice of the concerned High Court, may stablish. These specialised courts will resolve all “commercial” disputes of value of over Rs. 1 crore. Simultaneously, he jurisdictional limits of all high courts which have original side jurisdiction would be increased to Rs. 1 crore across he country. These disputes will be heard by judges who not only have a background in commercial laws but will also eceive special training in this area. he Act will have wide ramifications as the term “commercial” is widely defined and includes disputes ranging from ntellectual property rights disputes to disputes arising out of joint venture agreements and proceedings in aid of rbitrations. The Bill provides for a fast track mechanism with stringent timelines. And for the first time it introduces n the Indian system the concept of a case management conference wherein a procedural order is passed prior to trial, etting out a time table (including time-bound oral arguments supplemented with written arguments) which has to be trictly adhered to. The court is given wide powers to ensure that strict compliance is enforced. Moreover, the court, oo, is mandated to deliver its judgment within a period of 90 days. he Bill adopts the “carrot and stick” approach and judiciously offers “carrots” for compliance and provides courts the ower to wield the “stick” in case of delay by one of the parties. The Bill also makes mandatory the ‘cost follow the  vent’ regime, whereby, as a general rule, the party against whom the order/judgme nt is passed bears the entire cost of itigation, subject to exceptions where delaying parties, even if successful, have to bear part of the cost. hile an earlier version of this bill had been introduced during the United Progressive Alliance regime, the Bill, in the ords of the Law Commission, did “not make an effort to fundamentally alter the litigation culture in India” and that he changes suggested were “cosmetic” in nature. The Rajya Sabha had raised certain valid concerns including the nworkability of some of the procedural measures suggested. The Law Commission has carefully scrutinised these  bjections and introduced procedures which have been internationally tested (more specifically in the U.K. and Singapore). mendments n attempt is also being made to encourage arbitration, which is a form of alternative dispute resolution wherein rivate parties, usually by consent, appoint an arbitral tribunal to adjudicate on the dispute outside of the regular court  ystem. One of the major problems that have plagued this system is excessive judicial intervention and the proposed mendments are primarily aimed at reducing such interventions. oday, interventions by courts happen at all stages — pre-arbitration proceedings for appointment of a tribunal and ost-arbitration challenges to the award. The proposed amendments restrict the scope of pre-arbitration review to a prima facie” review of the existence of an arbitration agreement and narrow down the scope of the challenge of an

Upload: saichaitanya

Post on 05-Oct-2015

5 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

sai

TRANSCRIPT

  • 3/7/2015 TransformingcommercialdisputeresolutionTheHindu

    http://www.thehindu.com/todayspaper/tpopinion/transformingcommercialdisputeresolution/article6967749.ece 1/2

    Today'sPaperOPINION

    Transformingcommercialdisputeresolution

    AnirudhKrishnanTheenactmentofanActtoamendtheArbitrationandConciliationActandpassingtheCommercialDivisionofHighCourtsBillwillchangethefaceofcommercialdisputeresolution

    HANDINHAND:Inpursuanceofitseaseofdoingbusinesspropaganda,thegovernmentissettointroducethetwobillsinParliament.PictureshowsPrimeMinisterNarendraModiwithIndianbusinessmeninGujarat.PHOTO:AP

    Mostjudicialsystemsundergoperiodsofhighpendencyanddelayindispensationofjusticewhichareusuallyfollowedbyarealisationfromwithinandgiverisetowidescalelegislativereforms.WhileitwastheLordWoolfReportandtheChiefJusticesWorkingCommitteeReportthatspurredsuchachangeintheU.K.andHongKong,theJusticeA.P.ShahledLawCommissionReportsnumbered246and253couldpotentiallybewhattheIndiancommercialdisputeresolutionsystemhasbeenwaitingfor.ThesereportssuggestwidescalereformsbysuggestingtheenactmentofanActtoamendtheArbitrationandConciliationAct,1996,andaCommercialDivisionandCommercialAppellateDivisionofHighCourtsandtheCommercialCourtsAct(CommercialDivisionsBill/Act),respectively.

    Inpursuanceofitseaseofdoingbusinesspropagandaandanoverallattempttoattractinvestors,theBharatiyaJanataPartygovernmentissettointroducethesetwobillsinthebudgetsessionofParliament.Ifpassedandimplemented,theseenactmentsarelikelytochangethefaceofcommercialdisputeresolutioninIndia.

    CommercialDivisionsBill/Act

    TheCommercialDivisionsActintroducesacommercialdivisionineveryhighcourthavingoriginaljurisdiction(i.e.Madras,Delhi,Bombay,CalcuttaandHimachalPradesh)andcommercialcourtsinsuchdistricts,astheCentralgovernment,inconsultationwiththeconcernedStategovernmentandChiefJusticeoftheconcernedHighCourt,mayestablish.ThesespecialisedcourtswillresolveallcommercialdisputesofvalueofoverRs.1crore.Simultaneously,thejurisdictionallimitsofallhighcourtswhichhaveoriginalsidejurisdictionwouldbeincreasedtoRs.1croreacrossthecountry.Thesedisputeswillbeheardbyjudgeswhonotonlyhaveabackgroundincommerciallawsbutwillalsoreceivespecialtraininginthisarea.

    TheActwillhavewideramificationsasthetermcommercialiswidelydefinedandincludesdisputesrangingfromintellectualpropertyrightsdisputestodisputesarisingoutofjointventureagreementsandproceedingsinaidofarbitrations.TheBillprovidesforafasttrackmechanismwithstringenttimelines.AndforthefirsttimeitintroducesintheIndiansystemtheconceptofacasemanagementconferencewhereinaproceduralorderispassedpriortotrial,settingoutatimetable(includingtimeboundoralargumentssupplementedwithwrittenarguments)whichhastobestrictlyadheredto.Thecourtisgivenwidepowerstoensurethatstrictcomplianceisenforced.Moreover,thecourt,too,ismandatedtodeliveritsjudgmentwithinaperiodof90days.

    TheBilladoptsthecarrotandstickapproachandjudiciouslyofferscarrotsforcomplianceandprovidescourtsthepowertowieldthestickincaseofdelaybyoneoftheparties.TheBillalsomakesmandatorythecostfollowtheeventregime,whereby,asageneralrule,thepartyagainstwhomtheorder/judgmentispassedbearstheentirecostoflitigation,subjecttoexceptionswheredelayingparties,evenifsuccessful,havetobearpartofthecost.

    WhileanearlierversionofthisbillhadbeenintroducedduringtheUnitedProgressiveAllianceregime,theBill,inthewordsoftheLawCommission,didnotmakeanefforttofundamentallyalterthelitigationcultureinIndiaandthatthechangessuggestedwerecosmeticinnature.TheRajyaSabhahadraisedcertainvalidconcernsincludingtheunworkabilityofsomeoftheproceduralmeasuressuggested.TheLawCommissionhascarefullyscrutinisedtheseobjectionsandintroducedprocedureswhichhavebeeninternationallytested(morespecificallyintheU.K.andSingapore).

    Amendments

    Anattemptisalsobeingmadetoencouragearbitration,whichisaformofalternativedisputeresolutionwhereinprivateparties,usuallybyconsent,appointanarbitraltribunaltoadjudicateonthedisputeoutsideoftheregularcourtsystem.Oneofthemajorproblemsthathaveplaguedthissystemisexcessivejudicialinterventionandtheproposedamendmentsareprimarilyaimedatreducingsuchinterventions.

    Today,interventionsbycourtshappenatallstagesprearbitrationproceedingsforappointmentofatribunalandpostarbitrationchallengestotheaward.Theproposedamendmentsrestrictthescopeofprearbitrationreviewtoaprimafaciereviewoftheexistenceofanarbitrationagreementandnarrowdownthescopeofthechallengeofan

    http://www.thehindu.com/SAIUnderline

    SAIUnderline

    SAIUnderline

    SAIUnderline

    SAIUnderline

  • 3/7/2015 TransformingcommercialdisputeresolutionTheHindu

    http://www.thehindu.com/todayspaper/tpopinion/transformingcommercialdisputeresolution/article6967749.ece 2/2

    awardbyprohibitingananalysisonmerits.Specifically,thescopeofchallengetoaforeignawardhasbeengreatlynarrowed.

    Perhapsthebiggestshortfallofthepresentarbitrationregimeisthefactthatasuccessfulpartyinarbitrationisnotinapositiontoenjoythefruitsofitssuccessformanyyearsasthemerefilingofapetitionchallengingitsvalidityrendersthearbitralawardunenforceable.TheLawCommissionhassuggestedamendmentstoSection36oftheActandalosingpartywillhenceforthhavetosatisfyaCourtastowhyitisafitcaseforthearbitralawardtobestayedandtheCourtwillhavepowerstoorderthelosingpartytodepositpartoftheawardsumintoCourt.

    Anothermajorareawheretheproposedamendmentswouldmakeasignificantdifferenceisinrelationtoneutralityofthearbitraltribunalwhichisconstituted.TheSupremeCourtofIndia,inIndianOilv.RajaTransport,hasdeclaredatribunalappointedbyapublicsectorundertakingcomprisingitsownemployeestobevalidsubjecttocertainnarrowlycarvedoutexceptions.ThisdecisionissoughttobelegislativelyoverruledbyincorporatingtheInternationalBarAssociationguidelinesonconflictofinterestasascheduletotheAct.

    Further,theproposedamendmentssuggestamorerealisticinterestandcostsregime,permittingcompoundinteresttobeawardedandincorporatingthecostsfollowtheeventruleasthebaseruleinrelationtoarbitration.

    TheinvestmenttreatyarbitraltribunalinWhiteIndustriesv.UnionofIndiahasheldthattheIndiansystemdoesnotprovideeffectivemeansforaforeigninvestortoenforceitsrights.Thebillsproposedtobeintroducedinthebudgetsessionnotonlyexpeditecommercialdisputeresolutionbutalsoeffectivelydisincentiviseinitiationoffrivolousproceedings.

    However,enactingalawisonlypartofthesolutionimplementingiteffectivelybyselectingtherightpersonnelisasimportant.EffectiveimplementationoftheLordWoolfreportresultedineradicatingfrivolouscommerciallitigationintheU.K.statisticssuggestthatthenumberoflitigationsinitiatedfellbyaround80percent.CommercialdisputeresolutioninourcountryisatitscrossroadsandtheenactmentoftheselawsandtheirimplementationoverthenextcoupleofyearswoulddeterminewhetherinIndiathemaximUbijusibiremedium,i.e.everyrighthasaremedy,translatesintosomethingmorethanadejureprinciple.

    (AnirudhKrishnan,anadvocateoftheMadrasHighCourt,hasbeenaconsultanttotheLawCommissionfordraftingthereportsmentionedherein.Email:[email protected])

    Oneofthemajorproblemsthathaveplaguedthesystemofarbitrationisexcessivejudicialintervention,whichtheproposedamendmentsaimatreducing