https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196977 Where parties have agreed to foreign-seated arbitration under GAFTA Rules, civil-court interference by anti-arbitration injunction is unwarranted absent a strong showing of oppression, vexation, or other exceptional circumstances. A party's complaint of inconvenience or higher cost was held insufficient to restrain the agreed arbitral process, and the request for injunction was rejected. Questions of limitation, waiver, non-compliance, and objections based on the foreign seat and governing law were treated as matters for the arbitral tribunal, not for pre-emptive civil-court adjudication. The parties were held bound to their chosen forum, and the arbitration was allowed to proceed. en-us Fri, 28 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Dec 2017 16:02:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196977 Where parties have agreed to foreign-seated arbitration under GAFTA Rules, civil-court interference by anti-arbitration injunction is unwarranted absent a strong showing of oppression, vexation, or other exceptional circumstances. A party's complaint of inconvenience or higher cost was held insufficient to restrain the agreed arbitral process, and the request for injunction was rejected. Questions of limitation, waiver, non-compliance, and objections based on the foreign seat and governing law were treated as matters for the arbitral tribunal, not for pre-emptive civil-court adjudication. The parties were held bound to their chosen forum, and the arbitration was allowed to proceed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 28 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196977