It may not be possible at that stage, to decide whether a live claim made, is one which comes within the purview of the arbitration clause. The Chief Justice has to decide whether the applicant has satisfied the conditions for appointing an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Act. Interested in working with us? Severn Trent Water Hafren Dyfrdwy Severn Trent Services UK Help and contact Severn Trent Green Power. It is precisely for this reason that I am inclined to the view that at the pre-reference stage contemplated by Section 45, the court is required to take only a prima facie view for making the reference, leaving the parties to a full trial either before the Arbitral Tribunal or before the court at the post-award stage.”“Where a judicial authority or the court refuses to make a reference on the grounds available under Section 45 of the Act, it is necessary for the judicial authority or the court which is seized of the matter to pass a reasoned order as the same is subject to appeal to the appellate court under Section 50(1)(a) of the Act and further appeal to this Court under sub-section (2) of the said section.” expressed no view on the issue of prima facie or finality of the finding recorded on the pre-reference stage, he left the question open in the following paragraph :“12.
Points 1 and 2 are decided accordingly in favour of the respondents.”“As we have often pointed out, there is a danger in having two separate arbitrations in a case like this. If the parties to the Bill of Lading being aware of the arbitration clause in the Charter Party Agreement have specifically incorporated the same in the conditions of the Bill of Lading then the intention of the parties to abide by the arbitration clause is clear. It is in this sense that the Chief Justice has to examine as to whether there remains anything to be decided between the parties in respect of the agreement and whether the parties are still at issue on any such matter. The two parties and their actions are, in my judgment, so closely related on the facts in this case that it would be right to hold that the subsidiary can establish that it is within the purview of the arbitration clause, on the basis that it is “claiming through or under” the parent to do what it is in fact doing whether ultimately held to be wrongful or not.”“39. But, if the parent is blameless, it seems only common sense that the subsidiary should be equally blameless. For the Respondents It will be more appropriate to leave the seriously disputed questions to be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal on taking evidence along with the merits of the claim, subject matter of the arbitration.”“56.
26514-26515 Of 2011) | 28-09-2012“Any dispute or difference arising under or in connection with this Agreement, or any breach thereof, which cannot be settled by friendly negotiation and agreement between the parties, shall be finally settled by arbitration conducted in accordance with the Rules of Conciliation and Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce by three arbitrators designated in conformity with those Rules. It is necessary to indicate that he can also decide the question whether the claim was a dead one; or a long-barred claim that was sought to be resurrected and whether the parties have concluded the transaction by recording satisfaction of their mutual rights and obligations or by receiving the final payment without objection. Connecting decision makers to a dynamic network of information, people and ideas, Bloomberg quickly and accurately delivers business and financial information, news and insight around the world.Connecting decision makers to a dynamic network of information, people and ideas, Bloomberg quickly and accurately delivers business and financial information, news and insight around the world.Severn Trent Services Inc. manufactures water and waste water treatment systems. Severn Trent Services is a leading supplier of water and wastewater treatment solutions. A case containing two agreements with arbitration clauses arose before this Court in Agarwal Engg. Prima facie, it would be difficult to say that in spite of the finality conferred by sub-section (7) of Section 11 of the Act, to such a decision of the Chief Justice, the Arbitral Tribunal can still go behind that decision and rule on its own jurisdiction or on the existence of an arbitration clause. Even if such clause was there (is invoked), the same would be hit by Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 and under Indian law, arbitration is only an exception to a suit and not an alternative to it. Suite 200 7135-7136 Of 2012 (Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. The question, in the context of sub-section (7) of Section 11 is, what is the scope of the right conferred on the Arbitral Tribunal to rule upon its own jurisdiction and the existence of the arbitration clause, envisaged by Section 16(1), once the Chief Justice or the person designated by him had appointed an arbitrator after satisfying himself that the conditions for the exercise of power to appoint an arbitrator are present in the case. For the purpose of taking a decision on these aspects, the Chief Justice can either proceed on the basis of affidavits and the documents produced or take such evidence or get such evidence recorded, as may be necessary. Chief Executive Officer Stephane Bouvier was appointed CEO of Inframark, in July 2014, and has responsibility for the business across the USA. Obviously, he has to decide his own jurisdiction in the sense whether the party making the motion has approached the right High Court. We are inclined to the view that the decision of the Chief Justice on the issue of jurisdiction and the existence of a valid arbitration agreement would be binding on the parties when the matter goes to the Arbitral Tribunal and at subsequent stages of the proceeding except in an appeal in the Supreme Court in the case of the decision being by the Chief Justice of the High Court or by a Judge of the High Court designated by him.”©2020 - LQ Global Services Private Limited. We must continually evolve and improve how we take care of one of life’s essentials. If the Chief Justice does not, in the strict sense, decide the issue, in that event it is for him to locate such issue and record his satisfaction that such issue exists between the parties.