Login/Register

ODR-administered Arbitration finds Acceptance in Execution Proceedings Despite Unilateral Arbitrator Appointment Clause in the Agreement

Click to Save as PDF 📄

Delhi High Court Rules Email Delivery of Arbitral Awards Valid Under Arbitration Act.

Case Title: ODR-administered Arbitration finds Acceptance in Execution Proceedings Despite Unilateral Arbitrator Appointment Clause in the AgreementCourt: Commercial Court, New DelhiDate of Judgement: 05.01.2024

The Commercial Court in Saket, New Delhi, on 5th January 2024, dealt with an execution petition based on an arbitration award in a dispute administered by Presolv360 ODR Institution. The pivotal issue was the unilateral arbitrator appointment clause in the agreement. The Court was intimated that the appointment of an arbitrator was not unilateral. Notice had been issued to the opposite party for the appointment of an arbitrator from a neutral institution i.e. Presolv360, which is a recognized independent ODR platform, and no objection was raised. The Court stated that the appointment of the Arbitrator was not unilateral and issued notice to the judgment debtor in the execution proceedings.

You May Also Like

Kerala High Court Rules on Strict Adherence to Limitation Period in Arbitration Cases as per Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Read More

Delhi High Court Rules Email Delivery of Arbitral Awards Valid Under Arbitration Act

Read More

Providing Wrong Address Bars Objection to Arbitration Notice

Read More

Delhi High Court Rules Email Delivery of Arbitral Awards Valid Under Arbitration Act.

Case Title: Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports v. Ernst and Young Pvt Ltd1Court: Delhi High CourtDate of Judgment: 23.08.2023

The Delhi High Court recently passed a judgment that has affirmed that the delivery of arbitral awards via email is valid under the Arbitration Act.

In a recent decision, the Delhi High Court stated that the delivery of a scanned, signed copy of an arbitral award via email falls squarely within the ambit of valid delivery as stipulated under Section 31(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.This decision clearly delineates the legal standing of electronic delivery methods in arbitration proceedings.

The court specifically stated that “The law has to keep its pace in tandem with the developing technology. When service by email is an accepted mode of service, then sending scanned signed copy of the award/order of the Arbitral Tribunal to the parties would be a valid delivery as envisaged under Section 31(5) of the Arbitration Act.”