Summary: This blog aims to highlight the need for litigants seeking timely remedies to avoid protracted and stale litigation. It also focusses on adopting Alternative Dispute Resolution as an effective mechanism, wherever appropriate, for achieving faster and more effective remedies.Continue Reading When Delay Defeats Justice
Summary: This article highlights the Bombay High Court’s reaffirmation of limited appellate review for temporary injunctions. For litigants, this means a clearer understanding of the narrow grounds for appeal, fostering more strategic and efficient approaches to dispute resolution involving interim reliefs.Continue Reading Full Bench of Bombay High Court Clarifies Scope of Appellate Review of Temporary Injunction Orders
The present US administration signed an Executive Order (“EO 14209”) in February, halting the enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), pending new guidance to prosecutors. On June 10, 2025, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) issued new guidelines (“Guidelines”) on the enforcement of the FCPA, marking a significant shift in its approach to combating foreign bribery. These changes are a part of a broader strategy to recalibrate US anti-corruption efforts in line with national security interests and economic competitiveness.Continue Reading Global, India implications of US DOJ resuming scaled-back enforcement against foreign bribery
The Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (“MSME Act”), aims to promote, develop and enhance the competitiveness of MSMEs. To address the issue of delayed payments, several provisions of the MSME Act provide additional safeguards and benefits to MSMEs. One such safeguard is Section 15, which outlines the buyer’s liability to make payments due to MSMEs once the goods or services are accepted/ deemed to be accepted.[1] Similarly, Section 16, read with Section 17, states that delays in payments for goods supplied or services rendered by MSMEs, shall attract a compound interest rate of three times the bank rate notified by the Reserve Bank of India.[2] Further, reference to the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council (“MSEFC”) for any amount due under Section 17 can be made under Section 18. However, questions on the applicability of this statutory provision are raised, when parties to a dispute do not invoke the MSEFC mechanism and go under the pre-existing arbitration agreements.Continue Reading Arbitration Agreements v. MSME Act: Can interest rates under MSME Act survive outside of Section 18 proceedings?
The Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 (“FCRA/Act”), is an important piece of legislation that Parliament has enacted to prohibit acceptance and utilisation of foreign contribution or foreign hospitality for activities detrimental to national interest.Continue Reading Navigating the Evolving FCRA Landscape: Enhanced Responsibility of Chartered Accountants
There is increasing uncertainty surrounding the legal and commercial aspects of trade, against the backdrop of the United States imposing new tariffs. This evolving landscape of international trade exposes Indian exporters to heightened scrutiny under the US customs regulations, specifically those concerning transshipment of goods and adherence to the US Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) rules of origin (“Rules of Origin”).Continue Reading Chinese Goods, India Exports: Substantial transformation or risky transshipment?
Emergency arbitration (“EA”) is a pre-cursory mechanism in the arbitration process that allows parties to seek urgent interim reliefs prior to the constitution of the arbitral tribunal. To invoke EA, the party invoking the process must establish that it would face irreparable harm if the protection/ measures sought in the EA are not granted before the constitution of the arbitral tribunal.Continue Reading Emergency Arbitration: A Legal Lifeline or a Paper Tiger?
In a landmark decision[i] rendered on April 1, 2025, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held (“Supreme Court”)that the Hon’ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”) transgressed its jurisdiction by interfering with the resolution plan clause pertaining to the treatment of recoveries from fraudulent and wrongful trading applications filed under Section 66 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code”) .Continue Reading Treatment of Recoveries from Avoidance Transactions under the Resolution Plan
The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, on 30 April 2025, in a landmark judgment in Gayatri Balasamy v. M/s ISG Novasoft Technologies Limited,[1] addressed questions surrounding the power of courts to modify arbitral awards under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Act”).Continue Reading To modify or not – Supreme Court resolves quandary faced by 34 courts
The recent imposition of “reciprocal tariffs” by the United States (“US”) and the potential reaction/retaliation from trade partners is indicative of global trade dynamics entering an era of aggressive tariff enforcement and geopolitical recalibration.Continue Reading Tariffs, Trade, and Troubles: Compliances for Indian companies