NEW DELHI: Chief Justice DY Chandrachud on Thursday, said that simply establishing arbitration institutions is not enough, and measures must be taken to prevent these dispute resolution centers from being dominated by a “self-perpetuating clique.”
Speaking at the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, Chandrachud urged countries like India to rise to the challenge of fostering and promoting a culture of commercial arbitration.He believes that the strong institutionalization of arbitration will contribute to the development of an arbitration culture in the Global South.
“In recent years, institutions such as India International Arbitration Centre and Mumbai and Delhi International Arbitration Centers have been set up and are seeing a steady flow of arbitration matters. But the mere creation of institutions is not sufficient. We have to ensure that these new institutions are not controlled by a self-perpetrating clique. These institutions must be based on the foundation of robust professionalism and the ability to generate consistent arbitral processes,” the CJI said.
The CJI also pointed out that arbitration is no longer just an “alternative” of dispute resolution but has become the preferred approach for seeking commercial justice.
The CJI stressed that transparency and accountability, which are used to assess and critique the work of traditional courts, should not be foreign to the world of arbitration.
Chandrachud also expressed his hope that Indian arbitral institutions will emulate the success of their global counterparts in the coming years. He said, “Arbitral institutions are uniquely placed to cooperate with other arbitral institutions around the world to adopt best international practices and procedures. This will create a global convergence of arbitral procedures, creating more uniform institutional rules and structures. I hope the Indian arbitral institutions emulate the success of their global counterparts in the years to come.”
Chandrachud reiterated that the substitution of courts should not lead to the creation of opaque structures. He argued that the call for greater diversity in the world of arbitration, whether in terms of gender or from the Global South, is based on the strong belief that bringing a diversity of viewpoints will result in a more broad-based process. He also emphasized the significant role of technology in the arbitration process, noting that it offers cost-effective and time-effective solutions, such as allowing parties and arbitrators from different locations to participate in arbitral proceedings virtually.
The CJI highlighted that the adoption of technology at all levels of arbitration proceedings will enhance the efficiency and accessibility of the arbitration process. “You have instances where one party is based in Delhi, another in Bengaluru, while the arbitrators are in London, Mumbai and Singapore. Technology provides the digital environment allowing them to participate in arbitral proceedings virtually,” said Chandrachud.
Chandrachud also noted that despite the high courts and district courts in India disposing of a significant number of cases in 2023, the courts remain overburdened. He emphasized that the judiciary in India operates on the principle that no case is too small or too big and that every aggrieved person who approaches the courts has the right to a just remedy.
However, he acknowledged that not every case needs to be resolved before a court, and emerging forms of dispute resolution such as arbitration and mediation are gaining acceptance.
(With agency inputs)
Speaking at the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, Chandrachud urged countries like India to rise to the challenge of fostering and promoting a culture of commercial arbitration.He believes that the strong institutionalization of arbitration will contribute to the development of an arbitration culture in the Global South.
“In recent years, institutions such as India International Arbitration Centre and Mumbai and Delhi International Arbitration Centers have been set up and are seeing a steady flow of arbitration matters. But the mere creation of institutions is not sufficient. We have to ensure that these new institutions are not controlled by a self-perpetrating clique. These institutions must be based on the foundation of robust professionalism and the ability to generate consistent arbitral processes,” the CJI said.
The CJI also pointed out that arbitration is no longer just an “alternative” of dispute resolution but has become the preferred approach for seeking commercial justice.
The CJI stressed that transparency and accountability, which are used to assess and critique the work of traditional courts, should not be foreign to the world of arbitration.
Chandrachud also expressed his hope that Indian arbitral institutions will emulate the success of their global counterparts in the coming years. He said, “Arbitral institutions are uniquely placed to cooperate with other arbitral institutions around the world to adopt best international practices and procedures. This will create a global convergence of arbitral procedures, creating more uniform institutional rules and structures. I hope the Indian arbitral institutions emulate the success of their global counterparts in the years to come.”
Chandrachud reiterated that the substitution of courts should not lead to the creation of opaque structures. He argued that the call for greater diversity in the world of arbitration, whether in terms of gender or from the Global South, is based on the strong belief that bringing a diversity of viewpoints will result in a more broad-based process. He also emphasized the significant role of technology in the arbitration process, noting that it offers cost-effective and time-effective solutions, such as allowing parties and arbitrators from different locations to participate in arbitral proceedings virtually.
The CJI highlighted that the adoption of technology at all levels of arbitration proceedings will enhance the efficiency and accessibility of the arbitration process. “You have instances where one party is based in Delhi, another in Bengaluru, while the arbitrators are in London, Mumbai and Singapore. Technology provides the digital environment allowing them to participate in arbitral proceedings virtually,” said Chandrachud.
Chandrachud also noted that despite the high courts and district courts in India disposing of a significant number of cases in 2023, the courts remain overburdened. He emphasized that the judiciary in India operates on the principle that no case is too small or too big and that every aggrieved person who approaches the courts has the right to a just remedy.
However, he acknowledged that not every case needs to be resolved before a court, and emerging forms of dispute resolution such as arbitration and mediation are gaining acceptance.
(With agency inputs)