Abstract
In Chloro Controls India Pvt. Ltd. v. Severn Trent Water Purification Inc. and others, the Indian Supreme Court ruled that non-signatories to arbitration agreements for foreign arbitrations can be referred to arbitration especially in the cases of composite transactions. This is possible when a non-signatory is claiming through a party to the arbitration agreement. Although this is another step towards the development of a pro-arbitration jurisprudence in India following the ruling in Bharat Aluminium Co. v. Kaiser Aluminium, the judgment raises many concerns, such as causing long delays in the conclusion of arbitral proceedings and creating uncertainty as to the nature of the proceedings under section 45 reference applications. This article critically examines the ruling, identifies the relevant law, and explains the limits of its application.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
