印度知识产权纠纷可仲裁性的最新发展:改革的必要性

Ankur Singhal, Vasavi Janak Khatri
{"title":"印度知识产权纠纷可仲裁性的最新发展:改革的必要性","authors":"Ankur Singhal, Vasavi Janak Khatri","doi":"10.1080/24730580.2020.1800968","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Arbitrability in the context of IPR disputes has gained popularity worldwide. In India, there is no statutory provision that mandates the adoption of ADR when it comes to IPR disputes. The lack of any legislative insight thus stands as an impediment to efficient dispute resolution. The judiciary has also not taken a consistent stand in this regard. As a result, the law on this issue is a scattered version of what it could be. To improve the business environment and IPR protection, it is important to reform the law, keeping in mind the developments that are taking place in jurisdictions across the world. This paper studies the jurisprudence that has developed in India. It analyses the principles laid down by the Supreme Court of India in Booz Allen and Hamilton v SBI Home Finance, its inconsistent application by High Courts, and concludes that there exists scope for codification and uniformity.","PeriodicalId":13511,"journal":{"name":"Indian Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Recent developments concerning arbitrability of IPR disputes in India: a need for reform\",\"authors\":\"Ankur Singhal, Vasavi Janak Khatri\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/24730580.2020.1800968\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Arbitrability in the context of IPR disputes has gained popularity worldwide. In India, there is no statutory provision that mandates the adoption of ADR when it comes to IPR disputes. The lack of any legislative insight thus stands as an impediment to efficient dispute resolution. The judiciary has also not taken a consistent stand in this regard. As a result, the law on this issue is a scattered version of what it could be. To improve the business environment and IPR protection, it is important to reform the law, keeping in mind the developments that are taking place in jurisdictions across the world. This paper studies the jurisprudence that has developed in India. It analyses the principles laid down by the Supreme Court of India in Booz Allen and Hamilton v SBI Home Finance, its inconsistent application by High Courts, and concludes that there exists scope for codification and uniformity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13511,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-08-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/24730580.2020.1800968\",\"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/10.1080/24730580.2020.1800968","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

知识产权纠纷的可仲裁性已在世界范围内得到普及。在印度,没有法律规定在涉及知识产权纠纷时必须采用ADR。因此,缺乏立法洞察力是有效解决争端的障碍。司法部门在这方面也没有采取一贯的立场。因此,关于这个问题的法律是一个分散的版本。为了改善营商环境和保护知识产权,重要的是要改革法律,同时考虑到世界各地司法管辖区的发展情况。本文研究了在印度发展起来的法理学。它分析了印度最高法院在博思艾伦和汉密尔顿诉SBI家庭金融案中制定的原则,高等法院不一致的应用,并得出结论,存在编纂和统一的空间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Recent developments concerning arbitrability of IPR disputes in India: a need for reform
ABSTRACT Arbitrability in the context of IPR disputes has gained popularity worldwide. In India, there is no statutory provision that mandates the adoption of ADR when it comes to IPR disputes. The lack of any legislative insight thus stands as an impediment to efficient dispute resolution. The judiciary has also not taken a consistent stand in this regard. As a result, the law on this issue is a scattered version of what it could be. To improve the business environment and IPR protection, it is important to reform the law, keeping in mind the developments that are taking place in jurisdictions across the world. This paper studies the jurisprudence that has developed in India. It analyses the principles laid down by the Supreme Court of India in Booz Allen and Hamilton v SBI Home Finance, its inconsistent application by High Courts, and concludes that there exists scope for codification and uniformity.
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