Perkins Eastman Architects DPC v. HSCC (India) Ltd
The End of Unilateral Appointment of Arbitrator in India
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12728/culj.17.6References
Perkins Eastman Architects D.P.C. v. H.S.C.C. (India) Ltd., 2019 S.C.C. Online SC 1517 (India).
The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, No.26, Acts of Parliament, 1996 (India).
§12, The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, No.26, Acts of Parliament, 1996 (India).
Voestalpine Schienen GmbH v. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd (2017) 4 S.C.C. 665 (India).
TRF Ltd. v. Energo Engineering Projects Ltd. (2017) 8 S.C.C. 377 (India).
Perkins Eastman Architects D.P.C. v. H.S.C.C. (India) Ltd., 2019 S.C.C. Online SC 1517 (India).
Id at 10
Id at 16
Id.
D.K. Gupta v. Renu Munjal, 2017 S.C.C. Online Del. 12385 (India).
Id.
§11, The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, No.26, Acts of Parliament, 1996 (India).
Vikas Mahendra & Shalija Agarwal, Paving the way for Institutional Appointment of Arbitrators and Use of Technology in Arbitration, BAR & BENCH (Nov. 29, 2019), https://barandbench.com/paving-way-forinstitutional-appointment-of-arbitrators-use-of-technology-inarbitration/.
See Report of the High-Level Committee to Review the Institutionalisation of Arbitration Mechanism in India, Department of Legal Affairs (July 30, 2017), http://legalaffairs.gov.in/sites/default/files/Report-HLC.pdf.
Proddatur Cable Tv Digi Services v. Siti Cable Network, 2020 SCC Online Del 350.
See also Bharat Broadband Network Limited vs. United Telecoms Limited, (2019) 5 S.C.C. 755 (India).
