Arbitration Vs Arbitration

991 Words4 Pages
The law, in its .present form, recognizes situations where the intervention of the Court is envisaged at the pre-arbitral stage, i.e. prior to the constitution .of the arbitral tribunal. The Courts .in India had the occasion to deliberate upon the nature and scope of permissible pre-arbitral judicial intervention and the Supreme Court has ruled .in favour of dealing with the .issue prima facie. If the judicial authority is of the opinion that prima facie., there exists a valid arbitration agreement, then it shall refer the dispute to arbitration, and leave the existence .of valid arbitration agreement to be finally determined by the arbitral tribunal. However, if the judicial authority concludes that the .agreement does not exist, then the…show more content…
When parties choose .to proceed with .ad hoc arbitration, .the parties have the .choice of drafting their .own rules (most referred is the UNCITRAL Rules) and procedures .which fit their needs, as per the .nature of the dispute. Institutional arbitration, .on the other hand, is one in which .a specialized institution with a permanent character intervenes and assumes the functions .of aiding and administering .the arbitral process, as provided by the rules .of such institution.. Basically, the .contours and the procedures of the arbitral proceedings are .determined by the .institution designated by the .parties. Such institutions may also provide qualified arbitrators empanelled with .the institution. As a result of .the structured process and .administrative support provided .by institutional arbitration, it provides .distinct advantages, which are .unavailable to parties opting .for ad hoc arbitration. .Taking into consideration, the mentioned advantages, Law Commission of .India has suggested promotion .of institutional arbitration by recommending appropriate .proposals which it .hopes will be used .by the Supreme Court and High .Courts to promote institutional arbitration.. It proposes further, .to accord legislative .sanction to institutions .such as ICC (International Chamber of .Commerce, International .Court of Arbitration) .and SIAC . (Singapore International Arbitration Centre) .which provide for ".Emergency Arbitrator." by broadening the definition of "Arbitral Tribunal". The Commission has further discussed idea of having an Arbitral Commission .of India (with representation from all the stakeholders of arbitration) which would, inter-alia, .encourage the spreading .of institutional arbitration in India. .The recommendations made by the Law Commission relating to institutional arbitration, however .does not find any mention in the .Ordinance making amendments to the 1996
Open Document