Seat of arbitration assists in determining the curial law that would govern the arbitration proceedings. Prior to the Balco judgement, the law was clear that mere choice of a foreign seat will not exclude the applicability of Part I of the 1996 Act. The Balco judgement rectified this error in the interpretation and held that the choice of the seat of arbitration is akin to the exclusive jurisdiction clause. However, the judgement was applicable only prospectively. Balco judgement also created much confusion which was settled by subsequent judgements and amendments in the Act.
This essay attempts to examine the role of seat in international commercial arbitration in the light of Balco and other recent judgements delivered by the apex court.
Table of Contents
1. Distinction between venue and seat
2. Bhatia to Balco - From party centric to seat centric
3. Subsequent judgements
4. Prospectivity of Balco
5. Subsequent amendment in the law
6. Is Bhatia really overruled?
7. The correct test
8. Conclusion
- Quote paper
- Abhinav Mishra (Author), 2018, The role of seat in international commercial arbitration, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/388166
-
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X. -
Upload your own papers! Earn money and win an iPhone X.