Dispute Resolution

Expert Witnesses in International Arbitration: Untangling Complexity or Adding to the Cacophony?

Summary: This article examines the role of expert witnesses in international arbitration, highlighting their potential to clarify complex technical issues and assist tribunals in decision-making. However, it also critiques the challenges posed by party-appointed experts who may lack neutrality, and tribunal-appointed experts who may overstep their roles. The article discusses how expert reports often become overly complex and contradictory, hindering rather than helping the arbitration process. To address these issues, it proposes structured protocols, ethical standards, and innovative practices like “hot tubbing” and “expert teaming” to improve clarity, impartiality, and collaboration, ultimately aiming to make expert involvement a constructive force in arbitration.Continue Reading Expert Witnesses in International Arbitration: Untangling Complexity or Adding to the Cacophony?

The Right To Be Forgotten: Reclaiming Dignity In Digital Age

Summary: In today’s digital age, the Right to Be Forgotten (RTBF) is emerging as a vital extension of the right to privacy under Article 21. Sparked by the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s landmark Puttaswamy judgment, RTBF seeks to protect individuals from lasting online stigma. While courts have offered relief in select cases, India’s legal framework remains incomplete. The Supreme Court now faces a pivotal decision: can dignity and privacy outweigh open justice in judicial archives? RTBF isn’t just an abstract legal right, it’s a call for redemption, and the right to move on in a world that never forgetsContinue Reading The Right To Be Forgotten: Reclaiming Dignity In Digital Age

From Contracts to Chatbots: Navigating Justice in New-Age Disputes

Summary: At a recent thought leadership session on “Navigating Change: A Strategic Overview on Geopolitics, Regulation & AI”, our partner Ankoosh K. Mehta engaged in a lively conversation about New Age Disputes with Bhart Forge President and Group Counsel Vikram Munje. The article below is a synopsis of that discussion. Continue Reading From Contracts to Chatbots: Navigating Justice in New-Age Disputes

Summary: The United States has recently imposed an additional 25% ad valorem tariff on Indian imports, raising the total tariff to 50%. Positioned as a “penalty” for India’s continued trade in Russian oil, this measure marks a shift from purely reciprocal trade action to an instrument of foreign policy enforcement. In this article, we discuss the key features of the new order, its commercial and compliance implications for Indian exporters, and the steps businesses can take to manage legal and operational risks in light of these developments.Continue Reading U.S. Doubles Down: Tariffs on Indian Imports Surge from 25% to 50%

U.S. Tariff and Sanctions Actions Target Indian Trade: Key Considerations for Businesses

On July 30, 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump announced that the United States would impose a 25 per cent tariff on all goods imported from India. This announcement was first made via a social media post[1] and triggered widespread concern among Indian exporters and multinational stakeholders with supply chain links to India. On July 31, 2025 it was formalised by an executive order[2] which imposed varying ‘reciprocal tariffs” on a range of goods from 69 countries and European Union, including India. For countries not listed, a default rate of 10 per cent will apply. This order will be effective on August 7, 2025.Continue Reading U.S. Tariff and Sanctions Actions Target Indian Trade: Key Considerations for Businesses

Summary: This blog examines the increased compliance challenges faced by Indian companies due to the introduction of EU sanctions. European financial institutions and trading partners strictly enforce these measures, often adopting a zero-tolerance approach to secondary exposure. Consequently, Indian businesses with links to European markets must conduct rigorous due diligence as they face the risk of being cut off from euro-denominated transactions or even delisted from European stock exchanges.Continue Reading Emergence of the EU sanctions regime and their wide-reaching cross-border impact

Waste of an ODR process

Summary: The methods for appointment of arbitrators, as laid down by the Supreme Court, namely, mutual consent of the parties or pursuant to Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, were reiterated by the Bombay High Court in a Section 34 challenge. The petition relates to a financial institution unilaterally appointing arbitrator(s) through an ODR platform. The Bombay High Court sought statements from two ODR platforms, namely, Presolv360 and ADReS Now, on steps taken to ascertain whether the request for the appointment is lawful. It is imperative to have a carefully drafted arbitration clause to ensure that the outcome of arbitral proceedings involving an ODR platform aren’t nullified.Continue Reading Waste of an ODR process

Is SEBI obligated to provide only the documents it relies upon?

Summary: This blog analyses the duty of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) to disclose documents during regulatory proceedings. It traces the judicial evolution of SEBI’s disclosure obligations and discusses contrasting judicial views on the extent and limits of such obligation.

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”), as a regulator and a quasi-judicial body, is dutybound to act fairly and adhere to the principles of natural justice while conducting proceedings against parties. One such duty is to grant noticees access to the material that form the basis of the findings/ allegations made against them in the show cause notice.Continue Reading Is SEBI obligated to provide only the documents it relies upon?

Exclusive Jurisdiction vs Seat Conundrum: Delhi High Court Expands Jurisprudence

Summary: This article examines the evolving jurisprudence on the interplay between “exclusive jurisdiction” and “seat of arbitration” clauses in Indian arbitration landscape. The Delhi High Court’s decision in Viva Infraventure v. NOIDA highlights that an express exclusive jurisdiction clause will override a seat determined by the arbitrator. The judgment underscores the primacy of party autonomy and contractual intent. It also reinforces the importance of precise drafting in arbitration clauses to avoid jurisdictional conflicts and ensuring legal clarity.Continue Reading Exclusive Jurisdiction vs Seat Conundrum: Delhi High Court Expands Jurisprudence