(In the following post, Ms Renu Gupta, Advocate, analyses the recent judgment of the Supreme Court on exclusive jurisdiction clauses) The recent Supreme Court decision of Swastik Gases Private Limited v. Indian Oil Corporation Limited, relating to ouster of jurisdiction clauses has been discussed on this blog here. In this article I have discussed that this judgment does not provide any helpful...
‘Marketable Securities’ and ‘Spot Delivery Contracts’: The Supreme Court’s Analysis of the SCRA
In its recent judgment in Bhagwati Developers v Peerless General Finance, the Supreme Court has considered some important questions relating to the interpretation of the Securities Contract (Regulation) Act, 1956 [“SCRA”]. There were principally two questions before the Court: (i) the applicability of the SCRA to public unlisted companies and (ii) the construction of a settlement agreement to...
Preparatory activities and the commencement of a partnership
Section 3 of the Partnership Act, 1932 defines a partnership as the relationship between “persons who have agreed to share the profit of a business carried on by all or any of them acting for all”. This formulation shows that mere agreement is not enough: there must be a business which is carried on. The English Act of 1890 defines a partnership as the relationship that subsists between persons...
Petrodel v Prest: Lord Sumption’s Masterly Analysis of the Corporate Veil
When the history of the corporate veil is written, the year 2013 will perhaps be given as much prominence as the year 1897. Today, the UK Supreme Court allowed Mrs Prest’s appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal that seven properties in London owned by the Petrodel group of companies are not properties to which the sole controller of the group is ‘entitled, in possession or reversion’...
Agreements to Agree
As we have noted on this blog, the common law generally imposes no duty on a contracting party to negotiate in good faith. This is so even when parties ‘agree’ to agree, that is, purport to conclude a contract leaving certain (sometimes essential) terms to be agreed in the future. The House of Lords held in the well-known case of Walford v Miles [1992] AC 128 that such an agreement imposes no...
Papers published on BALCO
Ironically, the judgment of the Constitution Bench in BALCO may turn out to be as significant for domestic arbitration as it is for finally shattering the misconception that the omission of the word “only” in section 2(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 was designed to expand the jurisdiction of the Indian courts in relation to foreign arbitration. Some of these questions...
NLSIR Symposium
(The following announcement comes to us from the National Law School of India Review) The National Law School of India Review (NLSIR) – the flagship journal of the National Law School of India University (NLSIU), Bangalore is pleased to announce the VIth NLSIR Symposium on “Mapping the Future of Commercial Arbitration in India” scheduled to be held on May 18 and 19...
The Scope of the Jurisdiction to Grant Relief against a Penalty Clause
In Andrews v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group, the High Court of Australia has considered an important question of contract law: is the jurisdiction to grant relief against a penalty clause confined to a sanction triggered by an event that can be characterised as a breach of contract, or does it extend to a sanction triggered by other events? The Supreme Court of India had occasion to...
Herbert Smith Freehills India Essay Competition 2013
(The following announcement comes to us from the National Law School of India Review) The National Law School of India Review (NLSIR) in association with Herbert Smith Freehills is pleased to announce the Herbert Smith Freehills India Essay Competition 2013. The Competition is open to undergraduate law students from NLSIU, Bangalore, NALSAR, Hyderabad, WBNUJS, Kolkata, NLU, Jodhpur, NLU, Delhi...
Are consent orders under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 valid?
(In the following post, Ms Renu Gupta, Advocate, considers whether the Chief Justice or his designate is entitled to appoint an arbitrator under section 11 without considering whether there is a valid arbitration agreement) Can the Chief Justice (or his designate), appoint an arbitrator, under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Arbitration Act”), without deciding the...
Recent Comments