Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

NAFED v. Alimenta: Has India Missed the Wood for the Trees?

NAFED v. Alimenta: Has India Missed the Wood for the Trees? NAFED V. ALIMENTA: HAS INDIA MISSED THE WOOD FOR THE TREES? * ** by Ashwin Shanbhag & Amoga Krishnan Crests and troughs mark the development of the jurisprudence of Indian arbitration law. The enforcement of arbitral awards has regularly been hobbled by an anachronistic judicial approach that allowed for the merits to be examined despite it not being within the court’s remit – the proverbial Achilles heel to an otherwise robust legal framework that mirrors the UNCITRAL Model Law, 1985. Judgments that applied the brakes on the advancement of India as an arbitral hub took shelter behind the esoteric ‘public policy’ principle. A recent decision by the Supreme Court of India in National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India (NAFED) v. Alimenta serves as a worthy example . This case note considers the implications of the Court’s approach in setting aside an arbitral award that was held to violate the public policy of India. It argues that though the Court may have erred in examining the terms of the parties’ contract, its ultimate decision to set the award aside is capable of justification. Keywords: Enforcement of arbitral award, Arbitration, Foreign judgments, enforce- ment, Public Policy, Supreme Court of India http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Asian International Arbitration Journal Kluwer Law International

NAFED v. Alimenta: Has India Missed the Wood for the Trees?

Asian International Arbitration Journal , Volume 16 (2): 12 – Nov 1, 2020

Loading next page...
 
/lp/kluwer-law-international/nafed-v-alimenta-has-india-missed-the-wood-for-the-trees-od9EEwpjDS

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Kluwer Law International
Copyright
Copyright © 2020 Kluwer Law International BV, The Netherlands
ISSN
1574-3330
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

NAFED V. ALIMENTA: HAS INDIA MISSED THE WOOD FOR THE TREES? * ** by Ashwin Shanbhag & Amoga Krishnan Crests and troughs mark the development of the jurisprudence of Indian arbitration law. The enforcement of arbitral awards has regularly been hobbled by an anachronistic judicial approach that allowed for the merits to be examined despite it not being within the court’s remit – the proverbial Achilles heel to an otherwise robust legal framework that mirrors the UNCITRAL Model Law, 1985. Judgments that applied the brakes on the advancement of India as an arbitral hub took shelter behind the esoteric ‘public policy’ principle. A recent decision by the Supreme Court of India in National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India (NAFED) v. Alimenta serves as a worthy example . This case note considers the implications of the Court’s approach in setting aside an arbitral award that was held to violate the public policy of India. It argues that though the Court may have erred in examining the terms of the parties’ contract, its ultimate decision to set the award aside is capable of justification. Keywords: Enforcement of arbitral award, Arbitration, Foreign judgments, enforce- ment, Public Policy, Supreme Court of India

Journal

Asian International Arbitration JournalKluwer Law International

Published: Nov 1, 2020

There are no references for this article.