Does Section 12 Of The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996, Adequately Safeguard Arbitrator Neutrality In India? A Critical Study Of The Fifth And Seventh Schedules.
- IJLLR Journal
- Aug 8
- 1 min read
Mr Abhishek Sharma, VSLLS, VIPS-TC, IP UNIVERSITY
ABSTRACT
Arbitration is an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanism that involves settling disputes outside the courts by a neutral third party, called the arbitrator. An arbitrator needs to be neutral to ensure the fair and just resolution of disputes. Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ensures that arbitrators are Independent and impartial. The 2015 Amendment of the Act made Section 12 more robust by introducing the Fifth and the Seventh Schedule. While the Fifth Schedule marks the circumstances that can give rise to “justifiable doubts”, the Seventh Schedule, read with Section 12(5), clearly prescribes categories of ineligible persons to act as arbitrators, enhancing confidence in the Indian Arbitration Laws.1 This article examines whether these statutory provisions effectively safeguard justice and neutrality or whether a gap remains in practise. It examines statutory provisions along with judicial precedents to assess the practical effectiveness. The article argues that although the statutes provide for theoretical safeguards, in practise their effectiveness is limited because of gaps such as enforcement and procedural complexities, and the existence of unilateral appointment clauses for appointing an arbitrator.
Keywords: Arbitrator Neutrality, Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, 2015 Amendment of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Practical Effectiveness.
