Explain the process of Appointment and Termination of an Arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

 Explain the process of Appointment and Termination of an Arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996


Ø Appointment of Arbitrators

The procedure for the appointment of arbitrators is covered under Section 11 of the Act. In case that the parties are unable to choose the arbitrators in accordance with the arbitration agreement that has been signed between the parties, then the procedure prescribed is:

1.     Each party appoints one person as an arbitrator, 

2.   Then, the chosen arbitrators will appoint the final singular person, who will act as the presiding arbitrator.

In accordance with Section 11 Sub-Section (4) (a) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the parties must attempt to appoint the arbitrators within thirty days of receiving the request to arbitrate from the opposite party. If the parties to the dispute fail to choose within the limit, an appointment must be made to either the High Court, the Supreme Court, or the arbitral institution assigned by the court, as per Section 11 Sub-Section (4) (b). These authorities must verify arbitrators’ expert qualifications, independence or affiliation, and impartiality before appointing them. Written disclosures are also taken from the arbitrators regarding the above-mentioned qualities. 

For cases of international arbitration, the Hon’ble Supreme Court or the person or entity authorized by them will appoint an arbitrator. This arbitrator must be of a different nationality than the parties to dispute to ensure absolute impartiality. 

The application for the appointment made under Section 11 Sub-Section (13) to the Supreme or High Court or arbitral institution must be disposed of within thirty days from the date of serving mentioned on the notice for the opposite party. 

Ø Termination of Arbitrator

Under Section 13 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, liberty should be provided to the parties to agree on a procedure for challenging an arbitrator.

However, in the event that the parties can't agree for the said reason, a party who expects to challenge an arbitrator will, within fifteen days in the wake of getting mindful of the constitution of the arbitral tribunal or subsequent to turning out to be mindful that conditions exist that offer ascent to legitimate questions with respect to his freedom or fair-mindedness or he doesn't have the capabilities consented to by the gatherings, send a written assertion of the purposes behind the test to the arbitral tribunal. The arbitral tribunal is needed to choose the test if the referee doesn't pull out from his office or the other party doesn't consent to the test. In the event of the disappointment of the challenge, the arbitral council will proceed with the arbitral procedures and make an arbitral award. Where such an award is made, the gathering testing the authority may make an application for putting aside such an award as per Section 34 of the Act and if the award is put aside on such an application, the Court may choose with regards to whether the judge who is tested is qualified for any expenses.

 Section 14 of the Act gives that the order of an arbitrator will end and he will be substituted by another arbitrator, if He gets by law or accepted incapable to play out his capacities or for different reasons neglects to act immediately; and He pulls out from his office or the parties consent to the end of his order.

 Section 15 provides extra conditions under which the order of an arbitrator will end. These incorporate Where the arbitrator pulls out from office under any circumstances; or By or compliant with the agreement of the parties It is additionally given that where the order of an arbitrator ends, a substitute mediator will be named. Similar principles will be continued in delegating a substitute authority which was material to the arrangement of the judge being supplanted. Where a referee is supplanted, any consultation recently held might be rehashed at the caution of the arbitral council, except if in any case concurred by the gatherings. Nonetheless, it is given that a request or control of the arbitral council made before the substitution of an arbitrator will not be invalid exclusively in light of the fact that there has been an adjustment in the organization of the arbitral tribunal, except if in any case concurred by the gatherings.

 

References:

1. Characteristics of Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) and Advantages and Disadvantages of Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR)

 2. Legal Education in India: Challenges, Innovations, and a Vision

3. Sources of Law

4. Salient features of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

5. Disscuss the Differences between Arbitration and Conciliation

6. What type of Matter Cannot be subject to ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution)

7. Discuss the historical background and objectives of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

8. What is an Interim Measure by Court Under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996

9. Differences between Arbitration and Mediation

10. Difference between Mediation and Conciliation

11. Difference between Arbitration and Conciliation

12. Difference between Arbitration and Negotiation

13. Discuss the State Legal Service authority and the Legal Service Authority Act

14. Compare and contrast Negotiation, Conciliation, and Arbitration as forms of Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR)

15. Discuss the Role of Negotiation within the framework of Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR)

16. Analyze the Process of Conciliation in Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR)

17. Explain the key Elements of an Arbitration Agreement under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Res Gestae under Section 6 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872

  Ø Res Gestae under Section 6 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 “Walking on the edges of the footpath, you hear a screeching voice of a woman, turn to the left and exclaim in shock “oh my god, someone help” when you witness her being robbed off by a gang of four men. Will your statement be admissible in the eyes of law?” Facts, not a part of the main issue, which are supplementary and is so connected to the issue that it forms part of the same transaction is called Res Gestae. These facts ought to be contemporaneous in nature so as to be admissible by the court under Section 6 of the Indian Evidence Act . In layman’s terms, the facts which surround the fact in issue and have happened immediately before or after the ‘act’ has been done are admissible under this doctrine. If any of the facts are remotely connected to the main act, they wouldn’t be admissible in a court of law. Ø Definition of Res Gestae Res Gestae has been derived from Latin words meaning ‘’things done’’. It ...
Read more

Identification Parade

                Identification Parade     Ø What is Test Identification Parade A test identification parade, is a procedure commonly used in criminal cases to identify the accused in a court of law. Witnesses play a crucial role in this process as it’s their responsibility to recognize the accused among a group of individuals presented in the parade. The main purpose of this procedure is to assess whether the witness can accurately identify the accused from a group of people. This helps establish the witness’s reliability in identifying an unknown person in relation to the context of the crime. Law enforcement frequently employs this method to verify the witness’s credibility, especially in cases where the witness has never encountered the accused except at the crime scene. Ø Purpose of Test Identification Parade In the case of Ramkishan vs Bombay State [AIR 1955 SC 104], it was established that, during the investigation o...
Read more

What type of Matter Cannot be subject to ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution)

Ø Disputes that cannot be resolved through Arbitration The Arbitral Tribunal may be a private forum exclusively chosen by the parties to the dispute to urge their civil or commercial disputes to get adjudicated. Every civil and commercial dispute can be adjudicated by arbitration unless the jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal is barred from doing so. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not explicitly exclude the category of civil or commercial disputes from arbitrability.  Section 8 of the Act casts an obligation on the Judicial Authority to ask for arbitration in terms of the Arbitration Agreement. The Act doesn't exclude the category of disputes which are to be treated as non-arbitrable. However, the courts in certain disputes refuse to refer the parties to arbitration under Section 8 of the Act. Under Indian law, the kinds of disputes that can't be resolved by arbitration include: •        Criminal offences. •   ...
Read more