Chairperson: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dipak Misra, Chief Justice, Delhi High Court.
The Chairperson Hon’ble Mr. Justice Misra was glad to announce that the Community Mediation Centre is coming to Delhi. Hon’ble Speaker was also proud to state and inform the gathering that the High Court also has an Arbitration Centre. The Court’s adjunct arbitration has been showing good results. The Chairperson also stated that unlike the common practice of advocates becoming arbitrators and taking it as a part time work, it should be that the retired judges, advocates and experts must play the role of arbitrators. He also stated the difference between substantive and adjective law. IBA rules are a path in attaining the objective of adjective law.
Speaker 1: Mr. Pallav Shishodia, Senior Advocate
The speaker Mr. Shishodia stated that one of the armours lawyers learn, use (abuse) and constantly put in contest is rules if evidence. There is sufficient flexibility to apply these rules in conjunction with other rules or procedures as may govern a given international arbitration. He discussed the various articles of IBA Rules on taking evidence He concluded saying that the IBA Rules are fairly well thought, exhaustive and yet provides flexible code of conduct for taking evidence.
Speaker 2: Mr. Koka Raghava Rao, Senior Advocate
Mr. Raghava Rao stated that International Arbitration brings together parties from different nationalities and legal traditions. Hence the new IBA rules lay common guidelines for resolving all disputes which arise out of different arbitration proceedings in different cultures. He dealt with the articles laid down. In the concluding remarks he stated that the only important and significant aspects have been brought to light keeping in view the limited time available. These new IBA rules will apply to all arbitrations in which the parties agree to apply them whether as part of new arbitration agreements or in determining the rules of procedure in a pending or future arbitration.
Speaker 3: Mr. J.C. Batra, Senior Advocate
Mr. Batra said that India lacked an arbitration centre of international repute. We need to think about setting up a centre of that repute. When we go through the IBA rules, the rules have mainly been framed by the Europeans. There were no Indians when the rules were being framed. Lawyers themselves have framed these rules. They want the tribunal to comply with these rules. India has statutory Acts to collect evidence, however, if parties agree, the IBA Rules can be followed.
It is a myth that arbitration takes less time. Arbitration proceedings have a lifetime of their own. He quoted Abraham Lincoln and Mahatma Gandhi who have advised the lawyers to encourage the litigants to solve their problems on their own.
He also said that lawyers as draftsmen of agreements, keeps some loopholes in them so as to earn more money later. He concluded by stating that it is not the MNCs that pay for the arbitration proceedings but the common man.
Speaker 4: Ms. Supreeta Mishra, Advocate
Ms. Mishra mentioned in her speech that Institutional Ad-hoc rules did not make it compulsory for each arbitration to be governed by the same rules. Parties could choose their own rules but what happens in International Commercial Arbitration where foreign parties are involved? Hence, the IBA Rules came into existence. It is a useful resource which provide economical, efficient procedures for evidentiary hearing in Arbitration.
She dealt with the various amended Articles of the new IBA Rules. In conclusion she said that these rules have been updated to reflect current practices and challenges which will further the objectives of arbitration. |
