Yash Chougale
Dispute Resolution

Key Changes Introduced by 2015 Amendment to Arbitration Law

Contents hide

1 Introduction

2 Amendments in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

3 Key Changes

4 Challenges to Arbitration

5 Conclusion

6 Reference

7 Related

Introduction

Arbitration is a process in which a dispute is settled by agreement of the parties, to one or more arbitrators who make a binding decision on the dispute. By arbitration, the parties opt for a private dispute resolution procedure instead of

going to court to resolve matter in a calmer setting than usual. It is a legal process that promotes the settlement of disputes between two or more parties by the appointment of a third party whose decision binds the parties to the said

dispute. The main objective of this act was to make the country’s dispute resolution mechanism in conformity with that of international standards.

The Act is based on the 1985 UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration and the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules 1976 and UNCITRAL Conciliation Rules, 19803. By formulation of the Act of 1996,

the role of the court was minimized with the agreement having an arbitration clause directly referred to arbitration without any interference

by judicial powers, except as per the provisions of the Act of 1996. There is no procedure as such to conduct an arbitration proceeding. The arbitrator appointed to adjudicate the proceeding may conduct it in whatever manner

he considers fitting with the only condition that he must treat all the parties equally and give them a fair opportunity to be heard.

Amendments in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Key Changes Introduced by 2015 Amendment to Arbitration Law

The new term “Mediation Centre” is introduced in the Act which means, a mediation institution which is designated by the High Court under the Act where the High Court shall be having jurisdiction to appoint, arbitration institutes,

from time to time, determined by the Council, where there shall be no arbitration tribunal has been dismissed,

then the Chief Justice of the High Court concerned may appoint a panel of arbitrators to perform the functions of arbitration.

Appointments shall be made, at the request of the party, by an arbitration tribunal appointed by the Supreme Court, in the case of International Commercial Arbitration, or by the Supreme Court, in the event of decisions without international co-operation. The parties are free to agree on the procedure for the appointment of a mediator
(within 30 days of receiving an application to do so from the other party), however, in the absence of an agreement, each party will appoint one arbitrator and two appointed judges will appoint a third arbitrator to act as presiding arbitrator. In the event that both arbitrators fail to agree on a third arbitrator within 30 days from the date of appointment, after the amendment, the appointment shall be made, at the request of the party, by an arbitral tribunal appointed by the arbitral tribunal in the case of International Commercial Arbitration, or Court. Higher, in the case of mediation without international trade cooperation, as it would be.
Temporary orders under Section 17 cannot apply, after an arbitral award has been made.
A statement of claim and defence under Section 23 must be completed within six months from the date of receipt by the arbitrator, in writing of their appointment.
Award for non-mediation in international trade matters shall be made by the arbitrator’s court within a period of 12 months from the date of finalization of the appeal under Section 23 of the Act.
The International Commercial Arbitration Award may be as soon as possible, and
an Attempt may be made to issue a matter within 12 months from the date of finalization of cases under Section 23.
The extension for the application may be made by the party and during the extension, if the Court finds that the procedure is delayed due to reasons arising from the arbitrator’s court, then it may order a reduction in the arbitrator’s fee.
After the amendment only the arbitral tribunal record may be use under Section 34 to decide to set aside the arbitration award. In addition, the legislature has extended the power to lodge an appeal under Section 37 and 50 of the Act.
A new section, Sections 42A and 42B has been introduce with regard to the confidentiality of all arbitrary arbitration proceedings where disclosure is necessary for the purpose of commencement of the arbitration and that no suspicion or other legal action against the arbitrator has been obtain or intend to be made under this Act; terms made under it.
The new section, which means Part 1A is introduced in the Constitution of the Arbitration Council of India. After the amendment, in the case of the parties to the agreement referred to in Section 44, the court officer, at the request of one of the parties, or under his jurisdiction, may refuse to refer the parties to the designation if the prima facie finds that the said agreement is invalid and invalid. There are amendments to the lessons and experiences of the Mediator. The new amendment repeals Section 26 of the Act.
The positive change is that the courts have begun to enforce the award. The time frame under the Arbitration Act will no longer be await with minimal intervention by the Court.

Key Changes

Key Changes Introduced by 2015 Amendment to Arbitration Law

Amendment to Arbitration Law

1. The definition of “court” in Section 2 is amend to refer to the High Court only in cases of the International

Commercial Arbitration.

2. The provisions of the provision of temporary assistance (Section 9), court assistance in taking evidence (Section 27)

and Complaints (in particular, subsection

(a) of subsection (1) and subsection (3) of section 37) from now on will apply to international reports.

3. The provision for setting aside an award for reasons of public policy has been amend to include those awards i)

contrary to the basic policy of Indian law or ii) contrary to ethical or judicial views, in addition to the reasons already set out in the Act.

4. The 2015 Act sets a deadline for the termination of the mediation process. The appellate court must issue its award

within twelve months, which may be extended for a period of six (6) months. If the award is made in six months, the appellate court will receive additional funding. However,

if the award is delay beyond the time limit due to the arbitral tribunal, arbitral tribunal fees will be reduced

by five percent (5%) for each month of the delay.

5. Participants in the design may also choose to end the process in a faster way. Prize for such continuity will be award within six (6) months.

6. Any challenge to earn a mediation award must be remove within one year.

7. Section 17 of the previous Act of 1996 is replace by new section 17 where the trial court is empower to appeal interim proceedings as a court order under this section shall be enforced in accordance with the provisions of the Code

of Civil Procedure, 1908 in the same manner as court orders.

8. The Act of 2015 empowers the High Court or the High Court to appoint an arbitrator once the application has been

made by the parties. In the event that such an application is made, the court must immediately dismiss the application within 60 days.

10. Section 36 of the 1996 Act is replace by a new Section 36 where the application period for the waiver of a mediation award has expired,

then such award shall be enforceable in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure,

1908 in the same manner as a court decision. However, an application to set aside an arbitral award

will not provide an unconditional award unless the court has issued an order for the continuation of this arbitral award.

Challenges to Arbitration

Key Changes Introduced by 2015 Amendment to Arbitration Law

The Mediation Award is authorize to be stamp in terms of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 in terms of Section 3 read

with Section 17 and Schedule (Section 12) of the Stamp Act of domestic Arbitration Award. The prize for being a home prize that is not stamp / not stamp enough in terms of the stamp law (Section 33 of the Stamps Act) or

under Section 17 of the Registration Act.

In the case of M. Anasuya Devi Vs M. Manik Reddy (2003), the Honorable High Court held that the matter had come up immediately. Section 34 of the Act provides for the waiver of this award for the reasons set out in it. It is undeniable

that an application to set aside this award will not lie in any other capacity, excluding section 34 of the Act. The question of whether the award is require to be stamp and

registered will only apply if the parties are to submit a prize for their performance under Section 36 of the Act. It is in dispute with Section 47 of the Code of Public Procedure

and is prohibit by Section 34 of the Act.

In view of this, the Court referred the matter to a higher court, so that a final ruling could be made. Therefore,

at present the law relating to the confinement of a home arbitration award that is not stamp with Section 34 procedure, has not been amended. In addition, the High Court in the Anasuya case does not apply to Section 33 of

the Stamp Act which is by nature compulsory and no exceptions have been made by the legislature and therefore,

the lower courts cannot be bound by a matter that has not been raised or decided,

and the doctrine of sub-silentio is prohibit.

In terms of Section 35 of the Stamp Act, unless the stamp duty and the penalty payable in respect of the instrument have been paid,

the court may not act in accordance with the instrument. Therefore, unless the stamp duty and penalty pay in the Award are properly pay, the Court cannot hear the challenge of setting aside this Award and

also couldn’t enforce the Award. Therefore, the trial will be postpon under the Mediation Act,

indefinitely until the Return of the Certificate with the appropriate certificate is return to the Court.

Conclusion

Key Changes Introduced by 2015 Amendment to Arbitration Law

An amendment to the Mediation and Reconciliation Act, 1996 was introduce to remove the historic commercial arbitrations. The Supreme Court decision in the BALCO (supra) case where there was a barrier to Indian courts in

granting temporary relief and

helping to gather evidence in the case of international trade arbitration. This glitch has now been resolve through the application of section 9 and section 27 in international trade decisions. With the amendment of the definition of “courts” only to the Supreme Court if there is an international trade settlement,

parties to international trade disputes will not have to go to the lower courts for help.

With the enactment of the Mediation and Reconciliation Act (Amendment), 2015 the government seeks to speed up

the mediation process and assist the government in achieving its goal of making India a global trade cooperation seat

like other major business and financial regions of the world. . The 2015 law will also help restore the lost confidence of foreign investors in the Indian justice system and mediation.