Mundipharma To Vidya Drolia: Evolution Of Arbitrability Of IP Disputes In India

Bhargav Chaganti, Christ (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru, India

Dr. Avishek Chakraborty, Christ (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru, India

ABSTRACT

This study examines the evolution of arbitrability in the context of intellectual property (IP) issues within the Indian legal framework. The analysis starts by scrutinizing the pivotal Mundipharma AG v. Wockhardt Ltd. (2003) case, which first raised skepticism over the feasibility of resolving such conflicts through arbitration. The succeeding cases that have influenced the legal environment are subsequently examined in this study, encompassing those that have extended beyond the specific issues identified in the Mundipharma case. This paper examines the significant legal case of Booz Allen & Hamilton Inc. v. SBI Home Finance Ltd. (2011), which introduced the influential evaluation of arbitrability using the ‘rights in rem’ vs. ‘rights in personam’ test. The paper also delves into the persistent conflict between public policy issues and IP arbitration. This study investigates instances in which courts have encountered the possible clash between private dispute resolution and the preservation of public interest in intellectual property (IP) issues. The study concludes by examining the Vidya Drolia case, a notable advancement in the domain. This decision presented a comprehensive four-pronged test for arbitrability, providing a more sophisticated method for evaluating intellectual property conflicts for arbitration. The paper analyses the development of arbitrability in intellectual property issues in India, examining the significant cases and frameworks that have influenced this intricate landscape.

Keywords: Intellectual Property, IP Arbitration, Right in Rem, Right in Personam, Arbitrability.