Summary: A common misconception is that arbitral tribunals must decide every jurisdictional challenge under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, at the threshold before proceeding with the arbitration. This article explains why neither Section 16 nor the judicial precedents interpreting it mandate such a requirement and highlights the tribunal’s discretion to decide judicial issues when appropriate. Many jurisdictional challenges involve disputed facts or evidence, making an early determination impractical. Understanding this helps parties manage procedural expectations and avoid misplaced comparisons with Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.
Latest Post
More Posts
Miss the Deadline, Lose the Decree? SC clarifies effect of non-compliance and applicability of Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act
Findings of a Civil Court binding on Criminal Court? SC clears the air
Liberty Ends Where Fraud Begins: Supreme Court Signals Recalibration of Standards for Bail for Habitual Economic Offenders
BNSS and the pre-cognizance imperative: Procedural safeguard u/s 223 applies even to PMLA Complaints
Lawful Silence, Unlawful Assumptions: Bail, Confession, and Constitutional Rights
Alternate remedy no bar to High Courts exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court
Nascent stage of investigation no bar for quashing: Supreme Court clarifies High Court’s power under Section 528 BNSS
Steps under Section 154 CrPC no longer mandatory? Judgment in Anurag Bhatnagar-unique outlier or shift in jurisprudence?
WhatsApp Blocked: SC Directs Service of Section 41A CrPC Notice by Permissible Modes Only
Subscribe: Subscribe via RSS