Brief Overview:
Litigant can still seek assistance of Indian Courts in foreign seated institutional arbitrations. This holds good even where foreign arbitral institution provides for emergency and interlocutory measures and partial award has been passed.
Technical Details:
Whether adopting rules of an Arbitration Institute, which provide for emergency and interim relief could imply that parties agreed to seek interim relief only before that forum and are ousted from seeking interim relief under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act?
Bombay Hight Court has ruled no, in absence an express ouster of such jurisdiction.
Mere existence of framework for interlocutory relief in rules of the international arbitration institution cannot prevent Indian Courts from granting interim reliefs.
JC Takeaways:
Where there is risk of dissipation of assets or frustration of enforcement, recourse to Indian courts’ may help in securing the fruits of a foreign arbitral award.
Indian courts can retain jurisdiction under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act even where arbitration is seated outside India. This is now amplified to apply even where the (foreign) institutional rules provide for emergency/interim relief mechanisms.
For further details, please see:
Malaney Trading & Services LLP v. Uzer Makina VE Kalip Sanayi A.S., 2026 SCC OnLine Bom 5045.pdf
For any queries/clarifications, please feel free to ping us and we will be happy to chat:
- Jayesh H (jayesh.h@juriscorp.in)
● Palak Nenwani (palak.nenwani@juriscorp.in)
