Supervisory jurisdiction over arbitral tribunals challenges to interim orders in India

Article


Reynolds, M. 2022. Supervisory jurisdiction over arbitral tribunals challenges to interim orders in India. The Company Lawyer. pp. 323-324.
AuthorsReynolds, M.
Abstract

There has been recent controversy in India regarding a dispute between Amazon (A) and the Future Group (FG) when the Delhi High Court ordered an interim stay of arbitration proceedings being undertaken under the rules of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre.

The issue concerned the recognition of an interim award granted by an emergency arbitrator. Such enforcement required application to the Indian courts and of concern to those who arbitrate in India and who rely on the Indian courts for enforcement of awards made in India by such tribunals and in future clarification of Indian law as to the enforcement of an emergency arbitration award made in a foreign country for enforcement in India. The first of these points was clarified in the Amazon case. The second point will require confirmation if confidence in the process in India is to be maintained.

JournalThe Company Lawyer
Journal citationpp. 323-324
ISSN0144-1027
Year2022
PublisherSweet and Maxwell
Accepted author manuscript
License
File Access Level
Anyone
Web address (URL)https://www.sweetandmaxwell.co.uk/en-gb/products/the-company-lawyer-journal-and-ejournal-subscription-30928114
Publication dates
Online2022
Publication process dates
Deposited22 Apr 2025
Copyright holder© 2022 Thomson Reuters and Contributors
Permalink -

https://repository.uel.ac.uk/item/8z3yq

Download files


Accepted author manuscript
Amazon v Furture Group Indian SC MR 18 March 2022.pdf
License: All rights reserved
File access level: Anyone

  • 7
    total views
  • 2
    total downloads
  • 2
    views this month
  • 1
    downloads this month

Export as

Related outputs

International Arbitration: The Tide Rises and Falls, but the Sands of Error Crumble
Reynolds, M. 2025. International Arbitration: The Tide Rises and Falls, but the Sands of Error Crumble. The Company Lawyer. 46 (2).
Director Committed for Contempt of Court
Reynolds, M. 2024. Director Committed for Contempt of Court. The Company Lawyer. 45 (9).
A Case of Libre Recherche Scientifique
Reynolds, M. 2024. A Case of Libre Recherche Scientifique. The Company Lawyer. 46 (9).
Too Big to Fail?
Reynolds, M. 2023. Too Big to Fail? The Company Lawyer. 44 (8).
Of Conflicting Laws and Recognition: Unicredit Bank GmbH v Ruschemalliance LLC
Reynolds, M. 2023. Of Conflicting Laws and Recognition: Unicredit Bank GmbH v Ruschemalliance LLC. The Company Lawyer. 47 (10).
Rudimentary Prototypes in Case Management Techniques (1919–49)
Reynolds, M. 2023. Rudimentary Prototypes in Case Management Techniques (1919–49). in: Coulson, P. and Sawtell, D. (ed.) The History of the Technology and Construction Court on Its 150th Anniversary: Rewriting the Rules Oxford, UK Bloomsbury Publishing. pp. 49-82
Russian Anti-Suit Injunctions: Impediments to International Commercial Arbitration
Reynolds, M. 2022. Russian Anti-Suit Injunctions: Impediments to International Commercial Arbitration. The Company Lawyer. 43 (9), pp. 290-291.
Instruments of Peacemaking 1870-1914
Reynolds, M. 2021. Instruments of Peacemaking 1870-1914. Oxford, New York, Dublin Bloomsbury Publishing.