top of page

The Unruly Horse Revisited: Public Policy In Indian Arbitration Law

Jun 28
2 min read



Arpita Sondhi, B.BA LL.B. (Hons.),Jindal Global Law School (O. P. Jindal Global University)


INTRODUCTION


Arbitration is commonly understood as a dispute resolution mechanism that is grounded in party autonomy, speed, efficiency, and finality of awards. Parties who choose arbitration generally do so with the expectation that their dispute will be resolved conclusively, with minimal judicial intervention. However, Redfern and Hunter have observed that arbitration often presents a paradox: while it draws its power to escape the jurisdiction of the courts from a valid arbitration agreement, it depends structurally upon those same courts for constitution, interim relief, and for the ultimate enforcement of awards.1 This tension becomes most apparent at the post-award stage, where the principle of arbitral finality comes into direct contact with judicial supervision of the Seat Court.


In the Indian context, the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (hereinafter “the Act”) aims to minimise judicial interference and establish arbitration as an efficient and reliable mechanism for dispute resolution. However, the practical reality of the Indian arbitration framework reflects a more interventionalist judicial approach. This leads to a post-award framework where arbitral awards are frequently subjected to challenge, stays on enforcement are readily sought, and there is a culture of frequent adjournments, leading to a significant delay in the enforcement process.2 This raises concerns regarding whether arbitration in India truly achieves the finality envisioned under international arbitration standards.


This paper proceeds in three main parts. Firstly, it shall examine how arbitral finality is conceived and protected under the New York Convention, UNCITRAL Model Law, and how the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 was designed to reflect those international standards.


Secondly, it shall trace the evolution of public policy as an exception for enforcement of an arbitral award under Indian arbitration law. Additionally, the paper shall undertake a short comparative study by analyse United Kingdom’s arbitration framework with respect to the public policy exemption. Finally, the paper shall argue that arbitral finality in India is neither irreparably broken, neither is fully secured as it remains an ongoing project.



Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research

Abbreviation: IJLLR

ISSN: 2582-8878

Website: www.ijllr.com

Accessibility: Open Access

License: Creative Commons 4.0

Submit Manuscript: Click here

Licensing: 

 

All research articles published in The Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research are fully open access. i.e. immediately freely available to read, download and share. Articles are published under the terms of a Creative Commons license which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

 

Disclaimer:

The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the IJLLR or its members. The designations employed in this publication and the presentation of material therein do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the IJLLR.

bottom of page