Indian Supreme Court Overrules its previous case of Bhatia International

The Indian Supreme Court has just delivered its long awaited decision in Bharat Aluminium Co v Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Inc, Civil Appeal No. 7019 of 2005. This case is significant in overruling its earlier decision of Bhatia International v Bulk Trading SA (2002) 4 SCC 105 (see our previous post here) which extended the scope of Part I of the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 to foreign arbitrations.

The Bhatia International case raised eyebrows within the arbitration community because it gave the Indian courts an opportunity to intervene in a foreign award as if it were an Indian award. This was particularly so in respect of the concept of “patent illegality” under Indian law, allowing arbitration awards to be set aside on the basis of an error of law.

The concept of “patent illegality” is derived from the Indian Supreme Court decision of ONCG v Saw Pipes, 2003 (2) Arb.LR 5 (SC), and is part of the ambit of public policy of India, violation of which entitles the Indian courts to set aside an arbitral award. This is in addition to the usual grounds for setting aside an arbitration under Article 34 of the Model Law or Article V of the New York Convention. However, the concept of “patent illegality” only applies to arbitrations under Part I of the Indian Arbitration Act i.e. domestic arbitrations and international arbitrations with their seat in India.

There was mounting concern within the arbitration community when the Indian Supreme Court then set aside a foreign international arbitration award on the basis that Part I applied and that the award was “patently illegal” – in Venture Global Engineering v Satyam Computer Services Ltd, (2008) 4 SCC 190 the Indian Supreme Court applied section 34 of Part I of the Indian Arbitration Act and set aside a London LCIA award on that basis.

The Bharat Aluminuium decision reverses that by holding that Part I of the Indian Arbitration Act does not apply to arbitrations held outside of India. However, as a result, the Indian Supreme Court also held that the Indian courts were not able to render interim or interlocutory relief in assistance of foreign arbitral proceedings.

Readers should look forward to our next post which comments on the Bharat Aluminium decision.

About Shaun Lee

International Dispute Resolution and Arbitration lawyer. Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitration. Panel of Arbitrators and Panelist for Domain Name Dispute Resolution at the KLRCA.
This entry was posted in Arbitration, India, Singapore and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Indian Supreme Court Overrules its previous case of Bhatia International

  1. Pingback: Delhi High Court – Error of Fact constitutes Patent Illegality | Singapore International Arbitration Blog

  2. Pingback: Case Update: Bharat Aluminium | Singapore International Arbitration Blog

  3. Pingback: Case Update: (1) Lack of substantive jurisdiction in respect of one respondent does not affect award as against the other respondent; (2) Substantive jurisdiction not affected by finding of liability under a different agreement | Singapore International A

  4. Pingback: Case Update: (1) Lack of substantive jurisdiction in respect of one respondent does not affect award as against the other respondent; (2) Substantive jurisdiction not affected by finding of liability under a different agreement | Singapore International A

  5. Pingback: Arbitration India: Technology, Media & Telecommunications | Singapore International Arbitration Blog

  6. Pingback: The End of Doctrine of Patent Illegality for Foreign Awards in India? | Singapore International Arbitration Blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s