Upgrad LLM

limited power of arbitrator.

Advocate

Facts:

X, a company, entered into a contract with Y, a consultancy company. A clause in the agreement was as follows:

  Any disputes between the parties arising in relation only to the breach of the confidentiality clause in the contract will be solely decided by Mr. A within 15 days of such disputes arising between the parties. The decision of Mr. A shall be final and binding and shall exclude all other remedies including those of seeking redressal from a court of law with respect to such disputes or differences.

Query:

1. Whether the power of arbitrator be limited to a part of the contract only (breach of confidentiality clause in this case)?

2. Whether such limitation, of 15 days, can be imposed?

3. What remedies are available to the parties if neither party aproaches the arbitrator within 15 days of breach of confidentiality clause?

 
Reply   
 
IP Lawyer & Trademark Attorney

The role of Arbitrator would be limited to the breach of confidentiality clause and the time limit of 15 days can be imposed.

In case none of the parties approaches which can not be generally one has to be aggreieved then the partie can approach the Hon'ble Court for appointment of Arbitrator.

regards

 
Reply   
 



Yes Arbitrator can not go beyond the scope of agreement/contract.Arbitrator has to decide the matter within granted period but period may be extended with the consent of both the parties.In case 


 
Reply   
 

Dear Goyal Sir,

With due regard to your experience and expert advises in this forum, I second your opinion in this case on your first statement. Please correct me if Iam wrong. About your second statement it is absolutely correct.

Arbitration Act 1996 has given full powers to the Arbitrator based on the doctrine of Komptenz-Kompetenz principle, viz., Arbitrator has the powers to travel beyond the agreed terms and conditions, provided he shall not travel beyond the JURISDICTIONS for which I hereby draw your attentions to Clause: 16 of Chapter-IV of the said Act,

Furthermore i would like to refer one of the Supreme Court Judgment : M/S Konkan Railway Corpn. Ltd. & ... vs M/S Rani Construction Pvt. Ltd on 14 October, 2000, wherein, it is clearly mentioned that the Arbitrator has absolute powers in terms of travelling beyond the agreed terms and to rule his own Jurisdictions as well. That is the very reason the Arbitration clause is deemed to be independent of the Main Contract.

I plead you to correct if Iam wrong.

Kind regards,

Srinivas

 

 
Reply   
 
advocate/counsel supreme court

the questions are:

whether with in 15 days one need to approach A? if not what is the position of breach of contract?

Under what law 15 days provision is protected, How to determine 15 days from breach of contract? How A's decision can be final?

Under CPC sec 80 prescribes 60 days. That seems reasonable for one to give a legal notice to the other for suitable replies, after all, one has to check if there is a 'breach of contract' calls for thorough examination of circumstances of the issue. Then whether that breach has a remedy to be seen is also important else it will be a frivalous exercise. So 15 days is indeed inadequate so can be under natural justice equity and good conscience one need to allow maximum 60 days period if not that itself is arbitrary under the contract.

Then again how A's decision can be final when audi alteram partem principle is not followed under natural justice, one needs to see. If 'audi alteram partem'  that is oral/written hearing of arguments need to precede the decision of competent person to judge. if hearing principle is violated, then vitiates the judges directions, so every judicial court hears the case by necessary hearings of arguments placed before the judge. so it means no summary decision is valid and is indeed questionable and so final decision stated in the query suffers from a lot of deficiencies. So the decision is contestable before a court of competent jurisdiction, if the pettitioner is aggrieved. So  I THINK FINALITY IS ITSELF QUESTIONABLE HERE IN THE REFERRED MATTER.

 

whether the A's decision is final as far as breach of contract?

FINALITY IS QUESTIONABLE ON THE BREACH OF CONTRACT.

 

Whether arbitrator can travel beyond the terms of reference?

Here the A is restricted upto  'breach of contract', beyoud that his travel is restricted as is shown in the query.So Mr Goyal 's view appears okay.

Srinivasan's proposition will not apply in this particular reference please, with due apologies to srinivasan. Law is to view every single issue individually and not generally, so law needs professional approach please. So one pays hefty fees to good advocates sirs!

Good advocates means one need to spend timeon the issue very professionally in consonance with relevant law and facts of the issue sirs. thanks n regards.


Total likes : 1 times

 
Reply   
 

Thanks a lot Dr.G.Balakrishnan Sir, It was really an eye opener for professionals like me, specially on Kompetenz-Kompetenz principle.

Apologies Goyal Sir.

Srinivasan

 
Reply   
 

Hi all.

Sole Arbitrator was challanged on Ground of Biased, Colluded and Currupt in our Company's dispute with a PSU. The Arbitrator called up first meeting, issued some interim Order and in the second hearing passed an Award ex-parte. He is in business link interest with PSU. We challanged Arbitrator in every submission, but he never even replied to our Challange and passed his award without even refering to any document, and his Award was pre-drafted and pre-decided.

In this case we also realized that the Contract Obligation Period of 12 Months was over and even the Arbitration Clause was invalid. Hence we believe Arbitration is un-constitutional and its Award is Patently Illigle.

We already moved a Application to Court for Set-Aside.

Being in this case, the PSU has encashed the Bank-Guarantee without meeting its Obligations, we moved FC Magistrate and he passed CrPC 156(3) for Police Investigation, which is in process. Hence, during Arbitration we also submitted that this case is Criminal in nature and shall be adjudged by Criminal Courts and not by Private Arbitrator, but Arbitrator never addressed to this point. Arbitrator passed Award without giving any reasons for doing so. He also denied to have signed and issued his Interim Order and mentioned in final Award that he has not issued those, and that some body maliciously duplicated his sign in those letters. The Letters are issued by him and when he realised that this may be big ground for Set Aside, he denied to have issued same.

My querries are-

1. When Contract Obligation Period of 12months (Bank Guarantee Cover) is over (more than 3 months) Arbitration can be constituted (invoked) forcefully by one Party. There was no Arbitration Agreement and only Arbitration Clause. In this Arbitration unconstitutional and its Award illigle. 

2. We have challanged Arbitrator, but was not successful, and resulted into Award. Can this is enough Ground for Set-Aside.

3. Against our Complaint of Fraud and Cheating, the FC Magistrate ordered 156(3) in same case. Will this be ground for us that Arbitration can not address Criminal Issued.

4. Is there any option available for us to go ahead with Legal Action against Arbitrator who was involved in Criminal Frauds and Conspiracy against in collusion with claimant, for which we have full evidences, even the hand-writing experts report and Post office record.

5. Against our RTI applications to learn standard Contract Terms, the PSU is writing false and non-serious information. Can this be prosecutable.

Will experts guide me.

 
Reply   
 
advocate/counsel supreme court

BG is invalid for revocation. PSU cannot enforce the BG unless ratified by due endorcement. So cannot allow enforcing of BG by PSU. if bank allowed enforcement you have a case against bank as also PSU, AS 2ND PARTY.

Arbitration procedure faulted. Arbitration is a process if both the contestants approve the arbitrator and it seems he is a PSU appointed but not by Mr.Shusil 's company, as procedure followed is not in terms of Arb Act 1996, as Art act 1940 is already repealed.

Yes Arbitrator seemed to have behaved like PSU advocate. U have a case. yes but i cannot say for certai8n unless i read your whole agreement sir. i am an independent director on a textile company board as corporate advisor too.

dr.g balakrishnan

 

 

 

 

y

 
Reply   
 
advocate/counsel supreme court

it is always said, in green bag  292...Even in arbitration lawyers are condemned, for there is an English proverb, 'Arbitrate, lose somw, give lawyer more' and Scotch say,'Refer my coat, and lose a sleeve'!

Not in this world are lawers condemned to be thought badly of, for French  haqve it that, ' Unless Hell  is full never will a lawyer be saved'. The Danes say that the Devil once sat between two lawyers and declared, 'Virtue was in the middle', while the Dutch proverb  is so well known  that it has been adopted by many lands, ' the greatest lawyer, the worse christian'!, The English  express the same idea in the proverb, ' Dair and Softly , as awyers go to Heaven'!

Arbitrator is obverse or other side of Advocate! 

 
Reply   
 

LEAVE A REPLY


    

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



 

  Search Forum








×

Menu

CrPC MASTERCLASS!     |    x