High Court of Delhi holds that foreign law can govern an arbitration between two Indian parties
Dholi Spintex entered into a sale contract with Louis Dreyfus for supply of 600 metric tonnes of American imported raw cotton in bales to Dholi Spintex. Since the shipment and delivery of the raw cotton bales was delayed, Dholi Spintex refused to take delivery of the goods, pursuant to which, Louis Dreyfus initiated arbitration proceedings before the International Cotton Association (“ICA”) under Clause 6 of the contract. Arbitration under the ICA byelaws is conducted under the English Arbitration Act, 1996. Dholi Spintex sought an anti-arbitration injunction before the High Court of Delhi and objected to the arbitration on the following grounds: (i) the contract was between two Indian companies and was to be performed in India. Therefore, the law governing the contract must be Indian law; (ii) Clauses 6 and 7 of the contract made it clear that by conferring exclusive jurisdiction upon the courts of New Delhi, the parties intended for Indian law to govern the arbitration proceedings; and (iii) byelaw
200 of the ICA byelaws is opposed to and directly contravenes Indian public policy, which envisages that Indian parties cannot contract out of Indian law.
Issue (i): Whether two Indian parties can choose a foreign law as the substantive law of the
Issue (ii): Whether the express designation of a court under Clause 7 of the contract providing
for exclusive jurisdiction at New Delhi is determinative of the seat of arbitration?
Issue (iii): Whether the petition is maintainable under Section 45 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Arbitration Act”)?
The Bar Council of India does not permit solicitation of work and advertising by legal practitioners and advocates. By accessing the Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co. website (our website), the user acknowledges that:
The user wishes to gain more information about us for his/her information and use. He/She also acknowledges that there has been no attempt by us to advertise or solicit work.
Any information obtained or downloaded by the user from our website does not lead to the creation of the client – attorney relationship between the Firm and the user.
None of the information contained in our website amounts to any form of legal opinion or legal advice.
All information contained in our website is the intellectual property of the Firm.