Latest News
Revitalizing Arbitration in India: Expert Committee Proposes Key Reforms
Revitalizing Arbitration in India: Expert Committee Proposes Key Reforms
Introduction:
The Centre's efforts to reform the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, of 1996, took a significant step forward as the expert committee, led by former law secretary Dr T.K. Viswanathan, submitted its final report to the government. Established in June of the previous year, the 16-member committee, comprising legal luminaries and representatives from various sectors, aimed to evaluate the functioning of arbitration laws in the country and propose essential reforms.
Examining the Arbitration Landscape:
The expert committee, in its comprehensive review, delved into the intricacies of the arbitration process in India. Arbitration, as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism, allows parties to resolve conflicts privately without resorting to the courts. The decision rendered by arbitrators is binding, providing a quicker and often more efficient means of settling disputes.
Framework for a Model Arbitration System:
In a proactive move, the Ministry of Law and Justice had earlier solicited public opinion through a consultation paper released in June. The paper sought recommendations for a model arbitration system that prioritized efficiency, effectiveness, and economy while addressing the needs of users. The framework also targeted the cost of arbitration and fees charged by arbitrators, aiming to strike a balance between accessibility and fairness.
Key Players in the Committee:
The 16-member expert panel assembled by the Ministry of Law and Justice included legal stalwarts such as Behram Vakil from AZB Partners, additional solicitor general N. Venkatraman, and Shardul Shroff from Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas. The diverse composition of the committee, which included representatives from the Department of Economic Affairs, Niti Aayog, and public Indian industries, reflected a holistic approach to the reform process.
Addressing Court Intervention and Cost-Effectiveness:
One of the primary mandates given to the committee was to recommend changes to reduce court intervention in the arbitration process. The intention was to streamline and expedite the resolution process while simultaneously enhancing cost-effectiveness. Timely resolution remained a crucial aspect, ensuring that arbitration continues to be an attractive option for disputing parties.
Pending Challenges in Section 11 of the Act:
Simultaneously, the Supreme Court has been grappling with several petitions challenging the legality of decisions made under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. This section outlines the process for the appointment of arbitrators. The constitution bench is particularly focused on determining whether an individual ineligible to designate an arbitrator can nonetheless do so. This critical matter has been pending before the apex court, causing legal uncertainties.
Conclusion and the Road Ahead:
As the final report of the expert committee lands on the desk of the Supreme Court, expectations are high for a rejuvenated arbitration landscape in India. The proposed reforms, if implemented, have the potential to make arbitration more attractive, efficient, and accessible for parties seeking alternative dispute resolution. The ongoing scrutiny of Section 11 challenges further emphasizes the need for a robust and clarified legal framework to bolster the arbitration process in the country. As stakeholders eagerly await the court's response, the reforms suggested by the expert committee hold the promise of reshaping the future of arbitration in India.
- The Centre's efforts to reform the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, took a significant step forward as the expert committee, led by former law secretary Dr T.K. Viswanathan, submitted its final
- One of the primary mandates given to the committee was to recommend changes to reduce court intervention in the arbitration process.
- The proposed reforms, if implemented, have the potential to make arbitration more attractive, efficient, and accessible for parties seeking alternative dispute resolution.
