'Patent Illegality' A Ground Available To Set Aside Domestic Arbitral Awards Made After 2015 Amendment : SC [Read Judgment]
4 years, 9 months ago

'Patent Illegality' A Ground Available To Set Aside Domestic Arbitral Awards Made After 2015 Amendment : SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

The Supreme Court has observed that an arbitral award can be set aside under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act if it is patently illegal or perverse. The bench comprising of Justices R. Banumathi, Indu Malhotra and Aniruddha Bose observed that ground of patent illegality is a ground available under the statute for setting aside a domestic award made after the 2015 amendment. The bench comprising of Justices R. Banumathi, Indu Malhotra and Aniruddha Bose observed that ground of patent illegality is a ground available under the statute for setting aside a domestic award made after the 2015 amendment to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The ground of patent illegality is a ground available under the statute for setting aside a domestic award, if the decision of the arbitrator is found to be perverse, or, so irrational that no reasonable person would have arrived at the same; or, the construction of the contract is such that no fair or reasonable person would take; or, that the view of the arbitrator is not even a possible view. The ground of "patent illegality" for setting aside a domestic award has been given statutory force in Section 34, which was inserted as per the 2015 Amendment to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

Judgment Court Domestic Patent Illegality Patent Set Ground Award Observed Aside Setting Section 34 Section 34 Of Indu Malhotra Illegality 2015 Amendment  aside  read  domestic  ground  court  awards  available  set  judgment  patent  award  illegality  observed  setting  sc  view

History of this topic

Arbitral Award Can Be Set Aside As 'Patently Illegal' If View Taken By Arbitrator Is Not A Plausible One: Madras High Court
1 month, 2 weeks ago

Arbitral Award Can Be Set Aside As 'Patently Illegal' If View Taken By Arbitrator Is Not A Plausible One: Madras High Court

Live Law  

The Madras High Court bench of Justice P.B. Observations: The court noted that a plain reading of clause 13.16.5 shows that when price variation formula in CPA 32 is adopted, then the respondents cannot be entitled to claim any additional costs, unless there is a claim falling under the three exceptions, namely customs duty, excise duty and output TN VAT …

Arbitration Act | Appellate Courts Can't Reassess Awards, Must Limit Enquiry On Public Policy Breach : Supreme Court
1 month, 3 weeks ago

Arbitration Act | Appellate Courts Can't Reassess Awards, Must Limit Enquiry On Public Policy Breach : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court reaffirmed that arbitral awards should only be interfered with in cases of perversity, violation of public policy, or patent illegality. It emphasized that appellate courts cannot reassess the merits of awards and must limit their inquiry to whether the award breaches Section 34 of the Arbitration Act i.e., if the award is against the public policy of …

Expert Tribunal's Award Did Not Suffer From Patent Illegality, Cannot Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
2 months ago

Expert Tribunal's Award Did Not Suffer From Patent Illegality, Cannot Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Dharmesh Sharma has held that the scope of interference by the Court with the arbitral award under Section 34 is very limited, and the Court is not supposed to travel beyond the aforesaid scope to determine whether the award is good or bad. In the present case, the court …

Award Passed On Consent Cannot Be Held To Be Patently Illegal Or Contrary To Public Policy: Himachal Pradesh HC
2 months, 2 weeks ago

Award Passed On Consent Cannot Be Held To Be Patently Illegal Or Contrary To Public Policy: Himachal Pradesh HC

Live Law  

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justices Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Satyen Vaidya held that the award being primarily based on consent cannot also be held to be patently illegal or in conflict with the public policy of India. Brief Facts The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, …

Award Suffers From Patent Illegality When Adjudication Is Done Without Giving Any Reasons: Himachal Pradesh High Court
3 months, 2 weeks ago

Award Suffers From Patent Illegality When Adjudication Is Done Without Giving Any Reasons: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Live Law  

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Satyen Vaidya, while a Section 34 petition, has held that when an award has been found to be rendered without giving any reasoning regarding the adjudication of the disputes, the said award suffers from patent illegality apparent on the face of the award, and liable to be set aside. Firstly, the levy …

Award Cannot Be Set Aside On Grounds Of Mere Illegality Unless Patent Illegality Is Established U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Himachal Pradesh HC
4 months, 1 week ago

Award Cannot Be Set Aside On Grounds Of Mere Illegality Unless Patent Illegality Is Established U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Himachal Pradesh HC

Live Law  

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, affirmed that 'patent illegality' in the award calls for interference under section 34 of the Arbitration Act but a mere illegality is not patent illegality. The NHAI feeling aggrieved against the enhancement in the market value determined by the Arbitrator took recourse to Section 34 of the Act …

Award Must Not Be Set Aside On Ground Of Mere Erroneous Application Of Law Unless Patent Illegality Is Established U/S 34: Madras HC
4 months, 1 week ago

Award Must Not Be Set Aside On Ground Of Mere Erroneous Application Of Law Unless Patent Illegality Is Established U/S 34: Madras HC

Live Law  

The Madras High Court bench of Justices M.Sundar And K.Govindarajan Thilakavadi affirmed that the scope of interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is limited and within the contours of the ground specified under Section 34 of the Act. Brief Facts This is an Appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, against the order dated …

Perverse Arbitrator's Decision on Patent Illegality Leaves Award Debtor Defeated
4 months, 3 weeks ago

Perverse Arbitrator's Decision on Patent Illegality Leaves Award Debtor Defeated

Live Law  

The Madras High Court has ruled that patent illegality as a ground for setting aside an Award is available only if the decision of the Arbitrator is found to be perverse or so irrational that no reasonable person would have arrived at the same or the construction of the contract is such that no fair or reasonable person would take …

No Reappreciation Of Evidence Permitted Under Section 34 Of Arbitration Act, Arbitrator's Views Must Be Respected: Orissa High Court
8 months, 3 weeks ago

No Reappreciation Of Evidence Permitted Under Section 34 Of Arbitration Act, Arbitrator's Views Must Be Respected: Orissa High Court

Live Law  

The Orrisa High Court bench of Justice D. Dash held that in a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, reappreciating evidence is not allowed in order to replace the arbitrator's view with another. Observations by the High Court: The High Court referred to Section 37 of the Arbitration Act which states that an appeal can …

Patent Illegality | For Claim For Damages There Must Be Proof Of Actual Loss: Bombay High Court Stays Arbitral Award
11 months, 3 weeks ago

Patent Illegality | For Claim For Damages There Must Be Proof Of Actual Loss: Bombay High Court Stays Arbitral Award

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court single bench of Justice R.I. Chagla stayed an arbitral award noting that the Arbitrator contravened the settled law that for a claim for damages, there must be proof of actual loss which is sine qua non for such claim. Moreover, it argued that despite the Arbitrator's acknowledgment that the claim was one of damages, the actual …

Arbitral Award With Internal Contradictions Is Perverse And Patently Illegal; Delhi High Court allows Section 34 Petition
1 year ago

Arbitral Award With Internal Contradictions Is Perverse And Patently Illegal; Delhi High Court allows Section 34 Petition

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court single bench comprising Justice Sachin Datta held that an award suffering from internal contradictions is considered perverse and patently illegal under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Petitioner challenged the arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in the Delhi High Court. The Petitioner challenged the impugned …

Arbitral Award Lacking Adequate Reasoning Is Inherently Flawed With Patent Illegality: Delhi High Court Allows Section 34 Petition
1 year ago

Arbitral Award Lacking Adequate Reasoning Is Inherently Flawed With Patent Illegality: Delhi High Court Allows Section 34 Petition

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Mohan Kumar Ohri held that an arbitral award lacking adequate reasoning suffers from the inherent flaw of patent illegality. Thereafter, the Petitioner approached the Delhi High Court and challenged the award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 on the ground of absence of pre-award interest. The High Court …

Award Can Be Said To Be Suffering From 'Patent Illegality' Only If It Is An Illegality Apparent On The Face Of It : Supreme Court
1 year, 10 months ago

Award Can Be Said To Be Suffering From 'Patent Illegality' Only If It Is An Illegality Apparent On The Face Of It : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court observed that an award could be said to be suffering from “patent illegality” only if it is an illegality apparent on the face of the award and not to be searched out by way of re-appreciation of evidence.The narrow scope of “patent illegality” cannot be breached by mere use of different expressions which nevertheless refer only to …

An Arbitration Award In Violation Of The Provisions Of The Indian Contracts Act Is Patently Illegal: Delhi High Court
2 years ago

An Arbitration Award In Violation Of The Provisions Of The Indian Contracts Act Is Patently Illegal: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The High Court of Delhi has held that an arbitration award that is passed in violation of the provisions of the Indian Contracts Act, 1872 would be liable to be set aside as suffering from patent illegality. The bench of Neena Bansal Krishna partially set aside an arbitration award that was passed in contravention of Sections 59-61 of the Indian …

Wrong Application Of Law Not Leading To Perversity; Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside: Delhi High Court
2 years, 2 months ago

Wrong Application Of Law Not Leading To Perversity; Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has ruled that merely because the arbitrator had wrongly applied the.IN Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, while adjudication a dispute over domain names under the said Policy, the award cannot be set aside in the absence of perversity. The petitioner, Bright Simons, submitted before the High Court that the Arbitrator’s finding that the respondent had trade …

Arbitral Award Directing Specific Performance Of Contract, Cannot Be Set Aside On Ground Of Inequitable Nature Of Contract: Madras High Court
2 years, 5 months ago

Arbitral Award Directing Specific Performance Of Contract, Cannot Be Set Aside On Ground Of Inequitable Nature Of Contract: Madras High Court

Live Law  

The Madras High Court has ruled that an arbitral award directing specific performance of a contract, cannot be set aside on the ground that the nature of agreement between the parties was not capable of specific enforcement. The respondents, including J. Vengatesh, submitted before the Single Judge that the sale agreement was inequitable and unfair, and that the arbitral award …

Arbitration - Party Not Barred From Raising New Grounds To Set Aside Award In An Sec 37 Appeal: Supreme Court
3 years, 4 months ago

Arbitration - Party Not Barred From Raising New Grounds To Set Aside Award In An Sec 37 Appeal: Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court observed that a party is not barred from raising an additional ground for setting aside an arbitration award in arbitration appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration Conciliation Act,1996, merely because the said ground was not raised in the petition under Section 34 to set aside the Arbitration award.In this case, an Arbitration award was passed in …

Judicial Review Of Arbitral Awards: Public Policy And Its Evolution Exploitation
6 years, 7 months ago

Judicial Review Of Arbitral Awards: Public Policy And Its Evolution Exploitation

Live Law  

A fundamental principle of arbitration is minimum judicial intervention, and this minimization is accomplished through non-substantive review of arbitral awards by national courts. In order to take a defence of public policy, “there is some element of illegality or that the enforcement of the award would be ‘clearly injurious to the public good or, possibly, that enforcement would be wholly …

Discover Related