Inadmissibility of intervention does not amount to denial of justice

You are not logged in. If you are a subscriber, please Login to access. If you are not a subscriber, you can contact us for a rate quote at subscribe@iareporter.com. Alternatively, you can sign up to receive free email headlines here.

The AAI’s participation in the enforcement proceedings did not amount to a waiver of sovereign immunities

The AAI qualifies as an agency of India under the SIA, and thus benefits from its own immunities from execution

Background: Enforcement of awards against air transportation assets leads to debate about sovereign immunity of India’s Airports Authority

Prejudgment evidences apparent bias and denial of fair hearing and amounts to breach of natural justice, resulting in the award’s setting aside

Lack of focus on submissions in ICC arbitration and references to provisions not found in the applicable law undermine validity of tribunal’s reasoning

Court notes presiding arbitrator’s difficulties in deciding with an open mind after being fully immersed in similar facts and issues in earlier cases

Background: Dispute over additional labour costs arising from legislative change leads to parallel arbitrations and ICC award in consortium’s favour

Court dismisses India’s request for additional proceedings focused on its merits defenses under the New York Convention – opining that “[e]nough is enough!”

Court cannot review tribunal’s jurisdictional findings under New York Convention

Allegations concerning scope of BIT’s arbitration offer pertain to dispute’s arbitrability and cannot be reviewed anew under FSIA’s arbitration exception

Forum non conveniens doctrine is not available in proceedings seeking enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, thus BIT’s choice-of-law provision is irrelevant

FSIA is sole basis for establishing jurisdiction in cases involving foreign sovereigns; forum non conveniens is threshold question

Background: Stay of US proceedings for enforcement of telecoms award is lifted after Swiss courts reject set-aside and revision requests

Protocol provides for neutral “Observer” to vouchsafe for compliance

Since purpose of the visit is for arbitrators to familiarize themselves with the type of hydro-electric activities in the region, it does not matter that the visited plant is not in dispute

Court of arbitration is empowered to decide on whether to hold a site visit

US entities are awarded costs

Question of whether India waived its right to invoke excess of mandate will be examined with the merits

Foreign anti-suit injunctions do not produce any effect before French courts, confirming that the request to intervene is admissible

Maintenance and champerty doctrine cannot be invoked before French judge

India fails to prove that Assignment Agreement is a sham under applicable UK law

Archives