印度法院和双边投资条约仲裁

Prabhash Ranjan, Pushkar Anand
{"title":"印度法院和双边投资条约仲裁","authors":"Prabhash Ranjan, Pushkar Anand","doi":"10.1080/24730580.2020.1732693","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Indian courts have had limited opportunities to deal with bilateral investment treaty (BIT) arbitrations. In this paper we examine the interactions between BIT arbitration and Indian courts through a study of three domestic court cases arising in context of anti-arbitration injunctions in BIT arbitration. These three cases are Port of Kolkata v LDA, India v Vodafone, and India v Khaitan. Through these three cases, for the first time, Indian courts have thrown light on issues such as jurisdiction of domestic courts on matters pertaining to BIT arbitration, the applicability of the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘A&C Act’) to BIT arbitration and questions surrounding “abuse of process” by foreign investors. Two out of three cases held that the A&C Act does not apply to BIT arbitration. On “abuse of process”, the courts held that these questions should be addressed by BIT arbitration tribunals and not by domestic courts.","PeriodicalId":13511,"journal":{"name":"Indian Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Indian courts and bilateral investment treaty arbitration\",\"authors\":\"Prabhash Ranjan, Pushkar Anand\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/24730580.2020.1732693\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Indian courts have had limited opportunities to deal with bilateral investment treaty (BIT) arbitrations. In this paper we examine the interactions between BIT arbitration and Indian courts through a study of three domestic court cases arising in context of anti-arbitration injunctions in BIT arbitration. These three cases are Port of Kolkata v LDA, India v Vodafone, and India v Khaitan. Through these three cases, for the first time, Indian courts have thrown light on issues such as jurisdiction of domestic courts on matters pertaining to BIT arbitration, the applicability of the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘A&C Act’) to BIT arbitration and questions surrounding “abuse of process” by foreign investors. Two out of three cases held that the A&C Act does not apply to BIT arbitration. On “abuse of process”, the courts held that these questions should be addressed by BIT arbitration tribunals and not by domestic courts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13511,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-02-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/24730580.2020.1732693\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24730580.2020.1732693","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

印度法院处理双边投资条约(BIT)仲裁的机会有限。在本文中,我们通过研究在BIT仲裁中出现的反仲裁禁令背景下的三个国内法院案件,来研究BIT仲裁与印度法院之间的相互作用。这三起案件分别是加尔各答港诉LDA、印度诉沃达丰和印度诉海坦。通过这三个案例,印度法院首次阐明了国内法院对双边投资协定仲裁事宜的管辖权、1996年《印度仲裁与调解法》(A&C Act)对双边投资协定仲裁的适用性以及外国投资者“滥用程序”等问题。三分之二的案件认为《A&C法》不适用于双边投资协定仲裁。关于“程序滥用”,法院认为这些问题应由双边投资协定仲裁法庭处理,而不是由国内法院处理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Indian courts and bilateral investment treaty arbitration
ABSTRACT Indian courts have had limited opportunities to deal with bilateral investment treaty (BIT) arbitrations. In this paper we examine the interactions between BIT arbitration and Indian courts through a study of three domestic court cases arising in context of anti-arbitration injunctions in BIT arbitration. These three cases are Port of Kolkata v LDA, India v Vodafone, and India v Khaitan. Through these three cases, for the first time, Indian courts have thrown light on issues such as jurisdiction of domestic courts on matters pertaining to BIT arbitration, the applicability of the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (‘A&C Act’) to BIT arbitration and questions surrounding “abuse of process” by foreign investors. Two out of three cases held that the A&C Act does not apply to BIT arbitration. On “abuse of process”, the courts held that these questions should be addressed by BIT arbitration tribunals and not by domestic courts.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信