<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2014 (1) TMI 789 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242572</link>
    <description>At the Section 11 stage under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the court is confined to threshold questions such as the existence of an arbitration agreement, party status, limitation, live claim, territorial jurisdiction and other conditions for appointment, and it cannot finally decide on merits whether a dispute is an excepted matter or otherwise outside the arbitration clause. That question must ordinarily be left to the arbitral tribunal, which can rule on its own jurisdiction under Section 16. The Court also held that earlier decisions on Section 11 and arbitrability did not require reconsideration, and the later issue-classification approach remained consistent with the larger Bench ruling.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 Nov 2015 15:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=342966" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 789 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242572</link>
      <description>At the Section 11 stage under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the court is confined to threshold questions such as the existence of an arbitration agreement, party status, limitation, live claim, territorial jurisdiction and other conditions for appointment, and it cannot finally decide on merits whether a dispute is an excepted matter or otherwise outside the arbitration clause. That question must ordinarily be left to the arbitral tribunal, which can rule on its own jurisdiction under Section 16. The Court also held that earlier decisions on Section 11 and arbitrability did not require reconsideration, and the later issue-classification approach remained consistent with the larger Bench ruling.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242572</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>